The Story of Man
Carleton Coon
p 196-197
Borzoi Books, 1965
Few skeletons have been found in the Sahara, and these are hard to date because of soil erosion. In Arabia prehistoric archaeology has barely been started. Yet we can be reasonably confident, until other evidence upsets the theory, that these deserts were the home of the slender variety of Caucasoid man. In East Africa this type has survived among the slender, narrow-faced Watusi and other cattle people.
Tutsis have ~80% E3a accoding to published data, which ironically, was pointed out by Evil E to debunk Hiernaux, which Evil E failed to do. The PN2 clade subsequently proved Hiernaux right and Evil E wrong.
Now back to Coon, according to the late Coon, Neanderthal hybrids and now Tutsis are Caucasoids[both theories are debunked by modern genetics and anthropology], yet Evil E and his cohort Dienekes, stubbornly refuse to let go of outdated anthropological sources. Continued use of Coon will only lead both Dienekes and Evil E to a ....
.....when engaged in debates.
[This message has been edited by Topdog (edited 04 April 2005).]
quote:
Originally posted by Topdog:
Carleton Coon, Evil E's prime source of data for debates has been finally laid to rest with this post. May Evil E's constant spamming of Coon's outdated data cease and rest in peace...The Story of Man
Carleton Coon
p 196-197
Borzoi Books, 1965
Few skeletons have been found in the Sahara, and these are hard to date because of soil erosion. In Arabia prehistoric archaeology has barely been started. [b]Yet we can be reasonably confident, until other evidence upsets the theory, that these deserts were the home of the slender variety of Caucasoid man. In East Africa this type has survived among the slender, narrow-faced Watusi and other cattle people.
Tutsis have ~80% E3a accoding to published data, which ironically, was pointed out by Evil E to debunk Hiernaux, which Evil E failed to do. The PN2 clade subsequently proved Hiernaux right and Evil E wrong.Now back to Coon, according to the late Coon, Neanderthal hybrids and now Tutsis are Caucasoids[both theories are debunked by modern genetics and anthropology], yet Evil e and his cohort Dienekes, stubbornly refuse to let go outdated anthropological sources. Continued use of Coon will only lead both Dienekes and Evil E to a ....
.....when engaged in debates.
[This message has been edited by Topdog (edited 04 April 2005).][This message has been edited by Topdog (edited 04 April 2005).]
[This message has been edited by Topdog (edited 04 April 2005).][/B]
Thought Writes:
Great find!
quote:
Carleton Coonp 196-197
Borzoi Books, 1965
Yet we can be reasonably confident, until other evidence upsets the theory, that these deserts were the home of the slender variety of Caucasoid man. In East Africa this type has survived among the slender, narrow-faced Watusi and other cattle people.
And this is why it was critical for Coon's ideology to locate human origins in Eurasia, thus allowing free speculation for 'caucasian' diffusion. This also accounts for his pleadingly wishful thinking regarding the 'Arabian' origins of the Tutsi. Coon also classed Southern Sudanese like the Shilluk as "Mediterreanian-caucazoids"....
Out of Africa was really the shattering deathblow for 'caucazoid' anthropology.
Cooon's followers are just pathetically scrounging around trying to put Humpety'Dumpty back together again.
quote:
Originally posted by rasol:
Cooon's followers are just pathetically scrounging around trying to put Humpety'Dumpty back together again.
Thought Writes:
Perfect analogy for Evil E. The fact that these sorts of issues are gradually making there way into the mainstream have put the Medicentrics on edge. They are fearful that they may lose their honorary 'whiteness'. The struggle of Mussolini has come to naught.
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
'Out of Africa' was gibberish. Reading crap like that is why you are a
Anyone but you, and I'd assume they were joking, but knowing you, you really have no clue as to what Out of Africa refers to do you?
I don't know who has the bigger tendency to humiliate themselves...you, Abaza, or Erroneous E.
Out of Africa does not refer to some cheesy novel....it refers to a revolution in the field of anthropology.
You really do need DOTS connected for you don't you? ROTFL!
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
People laugh at this stuff.
We are laughing at you because of how stupid you are. You have no idea of what we are referring to, as usual.
So, I will humor your stupidity....explain 'Out of Africa' Professor. What is it exactly?
I should cut your head off [might clear things up for you], but I'm feeling merciful today professor....
In 1987, Allan Wilson, Rebecca Cann, and Mark Stoneking, researchers at the University of California-Berkeley, catapulted mitochondrial DNA into the headlines worldwide when they announced that they had traced it back 200,000 years to the oldest female ancestor of living humans–an African woman quickly dubbed Eve. Eve's debut rocked the archaeological community, which had been arguing for decades over whether modern humans evolved on more than one continent or instead swept out of Africa to replace more archaic hominids around the world. Wilson's group was attacked for sloppy science, and in fact there were problems with the original calculations. But genetic data from dozens of researchers have since almost universally supported the "Out of Africa" theory. "History has made a pretty consistent stamp on populations," says Lynn Jorde, a geneticist at the University of Utah, who has found African roots in nuclear DNA as well as in mitochondria and the Y. "Looking at more and more of the nuclear DNA is going to clarify the picture."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-origin_hypothesis.html
[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 04 April 2005).]
Forgive me if you've already been over this but I usually back away from a topic once the trolls get on it.
quote:
Originally posted by Kem-Au:
Maybe one of you guys can help me out. I'm not to big on the genetics things so forgive me if this is a stupid question. I watched a program on the biological Eve, and from what I understand, she was supposed to be the mother of all men outside of Africa. The point was that every non black human being is the result of a single migration out of Africa. Are they suggesting that everyone, including all Africans, can trace their lineage back to a single woman some 200,000 years ago?Forgive me if you've already been over this but I usually back away from a topic once the trolls get on it.
We need intelligent posters like you to help keep things on topic.
The idea is that she is a common ancestor of all human beings - not the only ancestor.
For example, you share two ancestors with your first cousin - two grandparents. But you also have two other grandparents that you do not share.
What is also of interest is that all people outside of Africa [black, non black, is irrelevant to the genetics of it] are descendant from a small group of people living in East Africa at the time.
We know that because the entire non-African maternal [female] DNA pool is derived from just L3 [on the map shown above].
The overwhelming majority of the human races genetic material is actually found in and among africans.
All the rest of the world [regardless of physical appearance] contains only a fraction of the genetic diversity found in Africa.
This is also why maps sometimes foisted on the unknowing with the intent of showing the great distance that exist between different parts of Africa or African peoples are misleading. Of course genetic distances in Africa can be contrived as 'great' because most of the genome is African to begin with.
For example, this map was used be Erroneous E to try to prove a point about the Lemba:
According to Erroneous E's BOTTOM LINE:
accompanying maps group Lemba with or near "Caucasoid" populations, away from "Negroids."
Until he was made to confront the reality of what the Lemba actually look like:
...at which point he was forced to reverse himself and claimed the Lemba were "negligibly" caucazoid. Whatever Euro-fool!
Same with the San, above grouped with the Zulu and not the Lemba. You could just as easily circle the Lemba, Ethiopians and Zulu and exclude the San. Or acknolwedge the reality of African diversity by circling them all.
Carleton Coon's caucazoid propaganda anthropology is dead. His 'followers' are intellectual zombies...brain dead, but just can't admit it. 
[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 04 April 2005).]
quote:
Originally posted by rasol:
The overwhelming majority of the human races genetic material is actually found in and among africans.All the rest of the world [regardless of physical appearance] contains only a fraction of the genetic diversity found in Africa.
Indeed. The deepest of E3b group is found in the Horn of Africa, which is why I eagerly await the explanation of a Eurasian origin of this haplotype.
quote:
Originally posted by Super car:
Indeed. The deepest of E3b group is found in the Horn of Africa, which is why I eagerly await the explanation of a Eurasian origin of this haplotype.
Considering that he posts pictures of Eurasian mail order brides and actually refers to them as "100% carriers of E3b" [male only chromosome]....I'd say, prepare for more comedy!
quote:
Carleton Coon, Evil E's prime source of data for debates has been finally laid to rest with this post
Nicely done TopDog.
You've shown that Coon's Arabian caucasoid theory about the Tutsi was wrong; and also that Erroneous Euro - who stated Coon was right with regards to the Tutsi was actually unfamiliar with Coon's views.
Two birds with one stone....speaking of which:
Continue to 
Dienekes pseudo anthropology blog, Evil Euro. - S. Mohammad.
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
Its pure crap rasol and is a revolution of absolutely nothing. People laugh at this stuff. as long as you hang onto these insane ideas about the Greeks nobody is going to consider the other information you put out.. They hear that and simply dismiss you as a kook. You guys have spent way too much time talking to each other.
I had to respond to this clown. The out of Africa theory is pretty much a fact that human beings first evolved in Africa (east) and then a small portion of them left and populated the world later evolving to become non-black or other genetic and phenotypic sub groups. Get a clue professor! People would laugh at you if you label this theory/fact as rubbish. It is the racist whites (not all but the old school sceintist train of thought) that try to establish themself as the center of the human family by making up pseudo-nomenclature that has Europeans as a starting point "caucasians" and then applying that faux term so generously to everone and their dogs. It sceintifically makes ZERO sense and is sceintifically flawed and bankrupt.
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
Obviously, northeast Africans have a strong caucasian componet. Even Dr. Hawass alluded to that awhile back. The only study you need is your two eyes.
use the right term European.. Caucasians are only from caucasia. Where the non-African elements that back tracked to some parts of north Africa from Caucasia?
quote:
First you talk about man originating in Africa.....as far back as 3.5 million years ago and then try to connect that to the classical Greeks
bzzt. Greeks have nothing to do with this thread.
The Professor's latest blunder came about because he confused OOA anthropological theory with the novel "Out of Africa".
quote:
Even Dr. Hawass alluded to that awhile back
Hawass is not a bioanthropologist. Go back to reading romance novels Professor.
Out of Africa' was gibberish. Reading crap like that is why you are a grown man and still do not undersatnd the basic structure of history. - Professor Horemheb.
Imagine a Professor who thinks OOA refers to a romance novel.
Go back to reading your 'gibberish' novels Professor.
quote:
Originally posted by rasol:
[B][/B]
Thank you for the breakdown.
quote:
Originally posted by Kem-Au:
Thank you for the breakdown.
You're welcome. I learned a long time back that the "Professor" really is completely clueless. He can't be underestimated in this regard. He just doesn't know. Moreover he does not want to.
My only reason ever for response to him is to bring his ignorant trolling to a stop, otherwise we will end up discussing 'Newt Gingrich' here instead of Carelton Coon - I've seen this happen too many times before. 
[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 05 April 2005).]
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
Keins, the only one laughing is me...at you. First you talk about man originating in Africa.....as far back as 3.5 million years ago and then try to connect that to the classical Greeks in 300 BC. Are you some kind of nut? This is the problem we have, uneducated people trying to tackle complicted problems and going all over the road. Go back and read your post Keins and think about what you just said.
Non Sequitor
Nothing about man evolving in Africa was directly connected to Greece. Stop with your out right lies and diversion tatics. You are the one who is undeucated especially when it comes to Africa, Arabs countries and yes even ancient Greece. You read preschool, feel good, surface dept topics on Ancient Greece and feel you are equipped to argu with Ausar, Rasol, Super Car and thought2 but time and time again you have NOTHING substantial to offer. All you have is emotionally charged, political and hateful rhetoric. 99% of the time your response is totally disconnected and devisive.
Now you are supporting coon when he is discredited worldwide for his flawed and biased scholarship. You have not even read his works nor have you read other scholars whom you try to discredit! So how can you be objective much less informed? Your problem lies in that you are willing to deny and ignore facts, suppress truth in order to make yourself feel good and to support a scientific and especially political dogma no matter how erroneous, hateful and wrong it is.
Now keins...there is your quote....That refers to events that happened in the last 3 million years, NOT in classical Greece. Where humans originated has squat to do with classical Greece. Anybody who tells you that ancient Egypt was foundational for classical Greece is a 100% pure goofball. If you want to live in wonderland thats up to you but if you ever sign up for a classical Greek class and write crap like that in an essay you'll flunk, as you should.
quote:
Originally posted by Keins:
Non Sequitor
Nothing about man evolving in Africa was directly connected to Greece. Stop with your out right lies and diversion tatics. You are the one who is undeucated especially when it comes to Africa, Arabs countries and yes even ancient Greece. You read preschool, feel good, surface dept topics on Ancient Greece and feel you are equipped to argu with Ausar, Rasol, Super Car and thought2 but time and time again you have NOTHING substantial to offer. All you have is emotionally charged, political and hateful rhetoric. 99% of the time your response is totally disconnected and devisive.Now you are supporting coon when he is discredited worldwide for his flawed and biased scholarship. You have not even read his works nor have you read other scholars whom you try to discredit! So how can you be objective much less informed? Your problem lies in that you are willing to deny and ignore facts, suppress truth in order to make yourself feel good and to support a scientific and especially political dogma no matter how erroneous, hateful and wrong it is.
I agree 100%
Horemheb, you're the only person in this thread talking about Greece.
http://www.familytreedna.com/images/2005%20TreeFTDNA.jpg
Haplogroup B is one of the oldest lineages in the world, and found found only in Africa.
[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 05 April 2005).]
quote:
Originally posted by Keins:
Non Sequitor
Nothing about man evolving in Africa was directly connected to Greece. Stop with your out right lies and diversion tatics. You are the one who is undeucated especially when it comes to Africa, Arabs countries and yes even ancient Greece. You read preschool, feel good, surface dept topics on Ancient Greece and feel you are equipped to argu with Ausar, Rasol, Super Car and thought2 but time and time again you have NOTHING substantial to offer. All you have is emotionally charged, political and hateful rhetoric. 99% of the time your response is totally disconnected and devisive.Now you are supporting coon when he is discredited worldwide for his flawed and biased scholarship. You have not even read his works nor have you read other scholars whom you try to discredit! So how can you be objective much less informed? Your problem lies in that you are willing to deny and ignore facts, suppress truth in order to make yourself feel good and to support a scientific and especially political dogma no matter how erroneous, hateful and wrong it is.
well put. I never saw Horemheb post anything more than 3 lines of baseless biased political assumptions he expects readers to explicitly and implicitly place faith in.
But when a guy believes that Colonialism was good because of its educative benefits, alarm bells should go off that he should not be taken seriously.
quote:
Originally posted by BigMix:
But when a guy believes that Colonialism was good because of its educative benefits, alarm bells should go off that he should not be taken seriously.
..which needless to say, dismisses pre-existing educative systems that are not in "English", or "French, and the like. But this is a whole another topic; we are only concerned with the need for disposal of antiquated 19th century thinking in bio-anthropology.
quote:
As far as I know the Brits did not eat anyone.
As far as you know, does not take you very far Professor, but we don't want to discuss medievil Europe's fetish for eating mummy here and now thank you.
We must ask you once more as a matter of common courtesy to either address the subject - Carleton Coon - or move along. Thank you.
And don't forget you share those German(Vandal) genes with master cannibals like Jeff "I am a sauteed thigh and buttocks man" Dahmer and Armin Miewes. Armin as we know liked his sausages "fresh off the man" style.
On the other hand we have no proof of Idi Amin's culinary tastes. And by the way Idi was Nubian--which is kinda close to Egypt--right?
Horemheb, I would not bring up cannibal if I were you. Caucasians were commiting cannibalism in the past and this is because of the harsh environment.
Those that constantly claim that others commit an act without evidence has likely committed such an act. Cannibalism is linked with Africans and Native Indians, because Europeans do not want to admit their history of cannibalism.
[This message has been edited by Roy_2k5 (edited 05 April 2005).]
quote:
Originally posted by rasol:
You're welcome. I learned a long time back that the "Professor" really is completely clueless. He can't be underestimated in this regard. He just doesn't know. Moreover he does not want to.My only reason ever for response to him is to bring his ignorant trolling to a stop, otherwise we will end up discussing 'Newt Gingrich' here instead of Carelton Coon - I've seen this happen too many times before.
Don't get me wrong. I completely understand the reason for responding to the trollers. I would hate to see someone new to the game read their posts and think they represented modern scholarship. They're just annoying as all hell because the keep posting the same ish. Is there anyone else out there other than Coon?
quote:
Originally posted by Kem-Au:
Don't get me wrong. I completely understand the reason for responding to the trollers. I would hate to see someone new to the game read their posts and think they represented modern scholarship. They're just annoying as all hell because the keep posting the same ish. Is there anyone else out there other than Coon?
In this day and age, other than the backward-minded stormfront buffoons, the only other two people I am aware of who share Coon's pre-historic hogwash, is Dienekes and Evil.
[This message has been edited by Super car (edited 05 April 2005).]
Read anything you can get your hands on from SOY Keita.
Read the essay: Finally in Africa? Egypt, from Diop to Celenko.
I linked to the above essay from this cite quite awhile back. If I can find another link, I'll post it.
[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 06 April 2005).]
quote:
Yes, Coon was wrong to call the Tutsi "Caucasoid",
quote:
just as Hiernaux was wrong to call them "Hamitic".
Incorrect. Hiernaux's whole point was that the Tutsi were NOT related to caucazoids but rather to other Africans. He was correct. The term 'Hamitic' is thus used with irony which, being lost in a fog of racism has apparently gone right over your head. There is no Hamitic race in bioanthropology, and Coon's racist screw-ups explain why the concept has been discarded.
quote:
S. Mohammad writes:Stupid Euro once again puts his foot in his mouth:
The Tutsi and Hutu have intermixed to some degree but, as groups, they remain strikingly different. The Tutsi exhibit 'Hamitic' features to a marked degree. Do they systematically differ from the Hutu in the direction of Caucasoids?In detailed study, relative growth in the two groups and in Europeans has been compared. In the development of a number of body proportions with age, which appears to be largely determined by heredity, the Tutsi are more different from Europeans than the Hutu[96]. In cephalic index, the Hutu are nearer to Yemenites than the Tutsi, whose long, narrow head makes their index lower than that of the other two groups..............
The Tutsi are taller than the Hutu by nearly ten centimetres; the average male stature is 176 cm. such tallness is by no means characteristic of North Africa or Western Asia: for example, the inhabitants of the central plateau of Yemen have an average stature of 164 cm. In skin colour, the Tutsi are darker than the Hutu, in the reverse direction to that leading to the caucasoids. Lip thickness provides a similar case: on an average the lips of the Tutsi are thicker than those of the Hutu. In most cases, however, they are not everted as in many West Africans. Like that of the Hutu, the hair of the Tutsi is spiralled(perhaps less tightly so, but this has not been quantified).
Apparently, either 'Hamitic' features developed in the Tutsi's ancestral line independently of any exotic source or, if an exotic element was introduced, it was such a long time ago that selection has thoroughly remodelled the resulting gene pool. Even if the second hypothesis was correct, the physical appearance of the Tutsi would result from evolution which took place in sub-Saharan Africa.Jean Hiernaux
The People of Africa
pg 61
Hiernaux correctly debunked Coon, and you have contradicted YOURSELF yet again by 1st insisting that he was right, and now saying he was wrong.
Fact is, Coon was wrong, and you STILL ARE wrong. Having settled that matter let's have a look at some more of Carleton Coon's "Mediterreanian" caucasoids .....
....in this case they have E3b and little to no E3a.
Would you like to recant further?
[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 07 April 2005).]
quote:
Originally posted by Evil Euro:
Yes, Coon was wrong to call the Tutsi "Caucasoid", just as Hiernaux was wrong to call them "Hamitic". As I proved, they carry only E3a, not E3b, and accordingly show no clear evidence of Caucasoid admixture (unusual-looking Paul Kagame notwithstanding)
Actually, not surprisingly this is an outright LIE.
This was a point that was proven to you, by others. And yes, at times even your own sources were used against you, because you misinterpret them; that is no cause for taking credit for the 'correction' of what ****you did in your best to distort***.
You have been claiming that they exhibited their traits because they must have come from east Africa, and then got their negroid traits from Bantus that over-run them. That you constantly reshape your position is no doubt a clear sign of bankruptcy in your entire outlook of geneology.
Geneology is best left in the hands of those who can understand them, and therefore correctly interpret them, even when they are outdated. You've done a good job of proving that you don't have what it takes to do such a thing. 
[This message has been edited by Super car (edited 06 April 2005).]
quote:
Originally posted by rasol:
Hiernaux's whole point was that the Tutsi were NOT related to caucazoids but rather to other Africans.
But he still likened their features to those of Hamitic North Africans. He was wrong. It turns out they simply look Negroid (as they should given that they're E3a and not E3b).
quote:
Fact is, Coon was wrong, and you STILL ARE wrong. Having settled that matter let's have a look at some more of Carleton Coon's "Mediterreanian" caucasoids
Of course, Coon never called East Africans "Mediterranean Caucasoids". He stated that they were a Mediterranean-Negroid hybrid, and he was absolutely correct. (Btw, do you ever plan on learning how to spell "Mediterranean"?)
quote:
....in this case they have E3b and little to no E3a.
Yeah, plus some A and B, and almost all L mtDNA.
[This message has been edited by Evil Euro (edited 07 April 2005).]
quote:
But he still likened their features to those of Hamitic North Africans. He was wrong. It turns out they simply look Negroid
Coon uses the EXACT same racist criterion on the Tutsi and other so called "Mediteranian caucazoids".
Carleton S. Coon makes an even more grandoise claim of these Mediterranean types. "Coon reported that excavations in Kenya and Tanganyika had uncovered the remains of a tall, extremely long-headed "Mediterranean" type with a tendency to great elongation and narrowness of face." - Dana Reynolds
For Coon, the Tutsi, the Masai, the Somali, the Shilluk, the Borana and others are the living proof.
But he was wrong of course, and so are you.
[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 07 April 2005).]
quote:...and M1 actually.
Yeah, plus some A and B, and almost all L mtDNA
Pretty much defines East African genetically.
Accordingly indigenous East Africans are Black.
Prehistoric East African whites do not exist.
[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 07 April 2005).]
The whole reason why many are able to get away with these extreme caucasoid racial classifications is much to do with sub-racial categories. Nobody in the field of physical/biological anthropology uses sub-races anymore,and people who do are fringe types.
The worst lies are ones that are partially true, and those are exactly the kinds of lies Evil-Euro tells!
He claims that caucasoids were indigenous to East Africa, yet the only so-called ‘proof’ he has is a measly few pictures of ‘East African’ people and that they carry E3b. He uses Ethiopians and Somalians as examples. I already knew about the E3 lineages being African in origin, and you guys have already explained this all so many times. What I find more ridiculous are his pictures!
LOL I find it funny that out of all the pics of Somalis out there, Evil-E only has maybe a couple. It’s true that Somalis have narrow features like narrow faces and noses, but isn’t it convenient that Evil’s two pics show men whose features are not narrow, but really thin and aquiline!
I’ve seen plenty of Somalis both in real life and elsewhere but I’ve never seen any with features exactly like that, not that there aren’t any Somalis like that, but you guys already know the game he plays.
Are Somalis mixed? The answer is only a very small percentage of them and these are mostly confined to the cities around the coast. As some of you may already know, many of these cities grew from settlements of Arab traders, so it’s not surprising. I believe these Somalis of Arab ancestry are known as Benadir and they seem to have a more privileged status because of their ancestry are seen as ‘closer’ to the Prophet Muhammad. I personally know a few Somalis and they tell me all this themselves.
Here is are more pictures of what most Somalis look like:
However, the Amhara and Tigre are a minorities who live mainly in the northeast. The vast majority of Ethiopians have nil admixture. The largest group in Ethiopia are the Oromo but there are others like the Borana, Kotu, Sidama, and even in the north there still remain unmixed groups like the Agau, Saho, and Afar.
[This message has been edited by Djehuti (edited 07 April 2005).]
The Peopling of East Africa
...The original (human) inhabitants of East Africa were probably hunter-gatherers who spoke click languages similar to the Khoisan people. The Sandawe and maybe the Hadza of Tanzania are perhaps the only direct descendants remaining in East Africa today. Over thousands of years, these people retreated or were absorbed as others migrated into the area. This later peopling of East Africa was carried out by three main African groups: the Cushitic-speaking peoples; the Nilotic-speaking peoples; and lastly the Bantu-speaking peoples. All these groupings are based on linguistic and cultural patterns and comprise the ancestors of most present-day East Africans– the Black Africans.
The Cushitic people originated from the Ethiopian Highlands and were the first known food producers in East Africa. They spread out from their original dispersal site to occupy most of northeastern Africa and some also migrated south. The Cushitic peoples probably already reached the Kenyan Higlands by c.1000BCE. The Oromo of Ethiopia and northeast Kenya are Eastern Cushitics. The Nilotes probably originated from the Sahel in the west and migrated east to the Nile River region of southern Sudan. They later moved further east until they reached the southwestern borders of the Ethiopian Highlands. The Nilotes are further divided into three branches based on where they migrated to: the Highland and Plains Nilotes (who are also part Cushitic) and the River-Lake Nilotes. Between 1000BCE and 1500CE, the Highland and Plains Nilotes migrated into the highlands and plains of Kenya and Tanzania. The Maasai and the Karamojong are Plains Nilotes. The River Lake Nilotes, however, followed the Nile Valley and settled in the lakes region of northern Uganda or traveled north to present-day southern Sudan. The Bantu people originated in eastern Nigeria. At first, they spread through the equatorial rainforest belt and then, between 500BCE and 300CE, eastward and southward into East and Southern Africa. Later migrations– from the south to the east– further dispersed them throughout the region. The Kikuyu, Ganda, Nyoro and Nyamwezi people are all Bantu in origin, as are most of the population of East Africa, but are confined mainly to the regions south of the Horn....
Dr. Elizabeth Dunstan and David Hall
of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London.
Of course, there were no caucasians mentioned as being one of the indigenous people, they were all “Black Africans”!!
That whole bit with the asian mail-ordered brides was absolutely foolish!! 
LMFO
He needs to just give it up!! Enough is enough!!!
[This message has been edited by Djehuti (edited 01 May 2005).]
...The soldiers, wearing night-vision goggles, had been lying in wait for the Somalis, in what some had referred to as a "hunting expedition." One army surgeon reported the dead teen had been shot in the head from close range after being wounded. ...
...Video footage of another airborne soldier Corporal Matt McKay, was found. When asked if he had any complaints about the mission he stated that "we ain't killed enough niggers yet."...
...Adding to the damage were allegations that an attempt to cover-up the events had stretched high into the defense staff. Important records and documents could not be found and there were allegations that they had been ordered destroyed. ...
...Soon the scrutiny of the behaviour of Canada's military outside the airborne turned up more disturbing stories. Incidents of sexual-harassment against women were revealed, lapses in discipline, brutal traditions, and a failure in command were found in other units. ...
...Italian troops were photographed raping a Somali woman and Belgian soldiers took photographs of themselves urinating on and burning Somalis. ...
http://www.netnomad.com/ilaria.html
...In the Summer of 1997, I saw wire reports about photographs that were published in the Italian magazine Panorama. One photo shows Italian soldiers attaching electrodes to the testicles of a Somali prisoner who is tied to the ground. In another, a Somali woman is being raped with the end of a flare gun. The photos were taken by the Italian soldiers themselves, peacekeepers recording their triumph for posterity. ...
And you wonder why Somali people are so hostile to foreigners, especially white Westerners!!
and why they are taking arms!
[This message has been edited by Djehuti (edited 01 May 2005).]
quote:
Are Ethiopians mixed? The fact is that the admixture is greater in Ethiopians than in Somalians
Some PN2-clade E3b Ethiopian groups have even more E3b than the Somali with even less admixture.
Arab admixture in Ethiopia was never at issue- nor is African admixture in Saudi-Arabia and Yemen.
What is exposed as false and indefensible is the 'white origin' Carltoon Coon and others fabricated for scores of different peoples including the Tutsi, and ultimately the entire human race....with the faux-caucasoid race label system.
[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 07 April 2005).]
I have no doubt that if they had been white Europeans instead of black Africans, the Somalis would not have had such a vile repulsive treatment! 
[This message has been edited by Djehuti (edited 07 April 2005).]
Just to avoid misunderstandings kindly break down the "Arab admixtures" in Ethiopia(Abysynnia--the original name used by Arabia to refer to "Ethiopia"). Of course, since Arabia is but an extension of Africa there would be nothing to block the notion that its original inhabitants would be black/African in the same way that Fijians and New Guineans are of strictly African phenotype.
quote:
Course, since Arabia is but an extension of Africa there would be nothing to block the notion that its original inhabitants would be black/African
Indeed in the context of ->
We actually have DNA evidence which fits very well with an intrusion of people from northeastern African into southwestern Asia. The Y-chromosome markers, associated with the male, fade out as you go deeper into the Middle East. - Ehret, Keita
....and
quote:
This study is from a Japanese bioanthropologist:
Hanihara T. 1996Comparison of craniofacial features of major human groups.
Department of Anatomy, Tohoku University School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan.Distance analysis and factor analysis, based on Q-mode correlation coefficients, were applied to 23 craniofacial measurements in 1,802 recent and prehistoric crania from major geographical areas of the Old World. The major findings are as follows: 1) Australians show closer similarities to African populations than to Melanesians. 2) Recent Europeans align with East Asians, and early West Asians resemble Africans. 3) The Asian population complex with regional difference between northern and southern members is manifest. 4) Clinal variations of craniofacial features can be detected in the Afro-European region on the one hand, and Australasian and East Asian region on the other hand. 5) The craniofacial variations of major geographical groups are not necessarily consistent with their geographical distribution pattern. This may be a sign that the evolutionary divergence in craniofacial shape among recent populations of different geographical areas is of a highly limited degree. Taking all of these into account, a single origin for anatomically modern humans is the most parsimonious interpretation of the craniofacial variations presented in this study.
....the pre-Arab nature of "Arabia" warrants a discussion all its own.
[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 07 April 2005).]
quote:
[i]The Peopling of East AfricaAll these groupings are based on linguistic and cultural patterns and comprise the ancestors of most present-day East Africans– the Black Africans.
Good post Djehuti.
quote:
Originally posted by Thought:
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/Forum8/HTML/001832.html
Thought Writes:Before Evil E and his mentor Diekenes get excited I should mention that a Upper Paleolithic origin of M has no bearing on Caucasoids at all. In fact Andaman Islanders may represent the pristine type that carried the M lineage in Asia. Europeans were still somewhat tropically adapted as late as the Mesolithic period.
quote:
Originally posted by Thought:
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/Forum8/HTML/001832.html
Thought Writes:Haplogroup M **may** have entered Africa prior to the Last Glacial Maximum along with U6 and the Y-Chromosome marker R1* and then diverged into the African specific marker M1. In addition it is of interest that early Europeans (Grimaldi Man) and so-called Aurignacian finds from Siberia (where upstream R1* spread as well) have cranial morphologies with greater resemblance to modern "Sub-Saharan" Africans than extant Europeans or NE Asians. From the perspective of history it is of interest to note that the Greeks mentioned two Ethiopias, a eastern Ethiopia in Asia and a western Ethiopia in Africa. This is consistent with the theme of a Andaman Islander type population spreading R1*, U6 and ancestral M lineages back into Africa. "Caucasoids" played no part in this process. Recent studies demonstrating substanial frequencies of M1 as far west in Africa as Guinea-Bissau call for larger sample sizes and more diverse populations studies in Africa to ascertain the shared gene pool of East and West Africans. We have hints of a genetic continuity existing from the Bay of Bengal to the Gulf of Guinea.
quote:
Originally posted by ausar:
What they don't tell you about pre-Islamic Arabia is that there were both negrito and Veddoid type populations in parts of Yemen. The oldest Arab group and the only Arab group that has direct links to the ancient Sabeans/Mineans/Himyarites is the Mahra. The Mahra are completely different from traditional Arabs and are actually quite distinct in cultural traits. Most Mahra are beardless people that can't grow long beards.
Rosa A, Brehm A, Kivisild T, Metspalu E, Villems R.
Department of Evolutionary Biology, Estonian Biocenter, Tartu University, Riia 23, 51010 Tartu, Estonia.
The matrilineal genetic composition of 372 samples from the Republic of Guine-Bissau (West African coast) was studied using RFLPs and partial sequencing of the mtDNA control and coding region. The majority of the mtDNA lineages of Guineans (94%) belong to West African specific sub-clusters of L0-L3 haplogroups. A new L3 sub-cluster (L3h) that is found in both eastern and western Africa is present at moderately low frequencies in Guinean populations. A non-random distribution of haplogroups U5 in the Fula group, the U6 among the "Brame" linguistic family and M1 in the Balanta-Djola group, suggests a correlation between the genetic and linguistic affiliation of Guinean populations. The presence of M1 in Balanta populations supports the earlier suggestion of their Sudanese origin. Haplogroups U5 and U6, on the other hand, were found to be restricted to populations that are thought to represent the descendants of a southern expansion of Berbers. Particular haplotypes, found almost exclusively in East-African populations, were found in some ethnic groups with an oral tradition claiming Sudanese origin.
quote:
Originally posted by Djehuti:
...During the 2nd millennium B.C., when Semitic peoples of Arabia were migrating and expanding, some Semitic tribes spread south in to southern Arabia, in what is now Yemen and from there, crossed the Red Sea into what is now Eritrea and northern Ethiopia. These settlers were the Sabaean people, and they mixed and intermarried with the native Cushitic peoples. Their modern-day descendants are the Amhara and Tigre people whose languages are **directly descended from Sabaean**...
Can you please shed some light on how Amharic (not referring to the script) directly descended from Sabaean.
quote:
Originally posted by ausar:
Here are the modern groups within Yemen that conform to the Southern Semetic type:The three tribes
that speak Mahra are known to other Arabs as the Ahl al Hadara.They
are the Qarra, Mahra and Harasis with parts of other tribes (WT
p.47.)The language is derived from the language of the Sabaeans,
Minaeans and Himyarites.[b]The Mahra with other Southern Arabian
peoples seem aligned to the Hamitic race of north-east Africa.The
Mahra are believed to be descended from the Habasha, who colonised
Ethiopia in the first millennium BC (WT p. 198). Many Bait Kathir
understand the Mahri language. The Qarra and Mahra have almost
beardless faces, fuzzy hair and dark pigmentation (WP171). http://www.globalconnections.co.uk/pdfs/MAHRAArabs.pdfProto-Semetic originates in the Horn of Africa:
ArabicBackground and history
Arabic belongs to the Semitic language family. The members of this family have a recorded history going bak thousands of years--one of the most extensive continuous archives of documents belonging to any human language group.
The Semitic languages eventually took root and flourished in the Mediterranean Basin area, especially in the Tigris-Euphrates river basin and in the coastal areas of the Levant, but where the home of area of "proto-Semitic" was located is still the object of dispute among scholars, Once, the Arabian Peninsula was thought to have been the "cradle" of proto-Semitic, but nowadays many scholars advocate the view that it originated somewhere in East Africa, probably in the area of Somalia/Ethiopia.
Interestingly, both these areas are now dominated lingustically by the two youngest members of the Semitic language family: Arabic and Amharic, both of which emerged in the mid-fourth century C.E.
http://www.indiana.edu/~arabic/arabic_history.htm
Report:
Near Eastern languages came from Africa 10,000 years ago
Investigator: Ene Metspalu
Tuesday May 28th, 2002
by Laura Spinney
Analysis of thousands of mitochondrial DNA samples has led Estonian
archeogeneticists to the origins of Arabic. Ene Metspalu of the
Department of Evolutionary Biology at Tartu University and the
Estonian Biocentre in Tartu, claims to have evidence that the Arab-
Berber languages of the Near and Middle East came out of East Africa
around 10,000 years ago. She has found evidence for what may have
been the last sizeable migration out of Africa before the slave
trade.
Genetic markers transmitted through either the maternal or paternal
line have been used to trace the great human migrations since Homo
sapiens emerged in Africa. But attempts to trace the evolution of
languages have met with less success, partly because of the impact on
languages of untraceable political and economic upheavals.
Metspalu and colleagues analyzed inherited variations in a huge
number of samples - almost 3000 - of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) taken
from natives of the Near East, Middle East and Central Asia, as well
as North and East Africa.
mtDNA is inherited through the maternal line, and by comparing their
data with existing data on European, Indian, Siberian and other
Central Asian populations, the researchers were able to create a
comprehensive phylogenetic map of maternal lineages diverging from
Africa and spreading towards Europe and Asia.
Working in collaboration with language specialists, they found that
this movement 10,000 years ago, which was probably centred on
Ethiopia, could well have been responsible for seeding the Afro-
Asiatic language from which all modern Arab-Berber languages are
descended.
"This language was spoken in Africa 10,000 or 12,000 years ago,"
Metspalu told BioMedNet News. "We think it was around that time that
carriers brought these Afro-Asiatic languages to the Near East." The
language, or its derivatives, later spread much further afield.
What could have triggered the movement she can only speculate. One
possibility is that increasing desertification was causing famine in
Africa and driving hunters further afield in search of animals.
Interestingly, the lineages they traced through this 10,000-year-old
migration didn't seem to get much further north than modern-day Syria
or east of modern-day Iraq. There is no evidence of the lineages in
the mtDNA of people from Turkey or Iran, says Metspalu.
"We can't understand why this boundary [to the Arab-Berber speaking
world] is so sharp," she said. "They came out of Africa, and when
they reached Turkey they just stopped." She believes some kind of
physical boundary, now vanished, must have impeded them.
The same genetic detective work has confirmed archeological evidence
that the biggest movement out of Africa occurred around 50,000 years
ago - which is when Africans first settled in other continents - and
that it originated in a small East African population.
<http://news.bmn.com/join>Journal of World Prehistory
12 (1): 55-119, March 1998
Southwest Arabia During the Holocene: Recent Archaeological Developments
Christopher Edens, T.J. Wilkinson
Abstract
Recent fieldwork has considerably increased our knowledge of early
Holocene settlement in Southwest Arabia. Neolithic settlement occured
within an environmental context of increased monsoonal moisture that
continued during the mid-Holocene. A now well-attested Bronze Age
exemplified by village and town settlements occupied by sedentary
farmers developed toward the end of the mid-Holocene moist interval.
The high plateau of Yemen was an early focus for the development of
Bronze Age complex society, the economy of which relied upon terrace
rain fed and runoff agriculture. On the fringes of the Arabian Desert,
the precursors of the Sabaean literate civilization have been traced
back to between 3600 and 2800 B.P., and even earlier, so that a
virtually continuous archaeological record can now be desribe for
parts of Yemen. In contrast to the highlands these societies relied
upon food production from large scale irrigation systems dependent
upon capricious wadi floods. Bronze Age settlement, while showing some
links with the southern Levant, now shows equal or stronger linkages
with the Horn of Africa across the Red Sea. Although some regions of
Yemen show breaks in occupation, others show continuity into the
Sabaean period when a series of major towns grew up in response to the
increased incense trade with the north. It is now clear that these
civilizations grew up on the foundations of earlier Bronze Age complex
societies.
Finally, Nicolas Faraclas suggests that the roots of Semitic languages, which are classified as part of the Afro-Asiatic language family, lie in the Dorfur-Kordofan region on the eastern edge of the Chad-Sudan border. He uses linguistic, archaeological, and climatic evidence to trace the routes by which Afro-Asiatic languages seem to have spread. The Niger-Congo, Nilo-Saharan, and Afro-Asiatic languages all seem to have diverged in a migration that began with the Last Major Wet Spell of the Sahara, which ran from 10,000 B.C. to 5,000 B.C. I am not qualified to judge the linguistic evidence he summarizes, but the maps he draws from that evidence and on which he bases his conclusions are persuasive. Expect to see the article cited regularly in world history literature. http://www.h-net.msu.edu/reviews/showrev.cgi?path=19489869847896
Before the apperance of Proto-Semites there were pockets of negrito and veddoid people in Southern Yemen.[/B]
Most of the extant mtDNA boundaries in South and Southwest Asia were likely shaped during the initial settlement of Eurasia by anatomically modern humans
Mait Metspalu et al.
“The overwhelming majority of the Iranian mtDNAs have been shown to lie in the West Eurasian domain of the global human mtDNA pool [27,28]. Here we focus on the analysis of mtDNA lineages that are shared between Indians and Iranians and bear signals of pre-Holocene expansion in the region.”
“We found haplogroup M ubiquitous at almost 58% among the caste, and 72% among the tribal populations.”
“Over 90% of the mtDNAs found in Iran belong to haplogroups HV, TJ, U, N1, N2 and X, commonly found in West Eurasia.”
“Compared to India, haplogroup M frequency in Iran is marginally low (5.3%) and there are no distinguished Iranian-specific sub-clades of haplogroup M. All Iranian haplogroup M lineages can be seen as derived from other regional variants of the haplogroup: eleven show affiliation to haplogroup M lineages found in India, twelve in East and Central Asia (D, G, and M8) and one in northeast Africa (M1).”
“We found that haplogroup M frequency drops abruptly from about 60% in India to about 5% in Iran, marking the western border of the haplogroup M distribution. A similarly sharp border cuts the distribution of Indian-specific mtDNA haplogroups to the east and to the north of the subcontinent. We therefore propose that the initial mtDNA pool established upon the peopling of South Asia has not been replaced but has rather been reshaped in situ by major demographic episodes in the past and garnished by relatively minor events of gene flow both from the West and the East during more recent chapters of the demographic history in the region.”
quote:
Originally posted by Thought2:
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=516768
Most of the extant mtDNA boundaries in South and Southwest Asia were likely shaped during the initial settlement of Eurasia by anatomically modern humansMait Metspalu et al.
“The overwhelming majority of the Iranian mtDNAs have been shown to lie in the West Eurasian domain of the global human mtDNA pool [27,28]. Here we focus on the analysis of mtDNA lineages that are shared between Indians and Iranians and bear signals of pre-Holocene expansion in the region.”
“We found haplogroup M ubiquitous at almost 58% among the caste, and 72% among the tribal populations.”
“Over 90% of the mtDNAs found in Iran belong to haplogroups HV, TJ, U, N1, N2 and X, commonly found in West Eurasia.”
“Compared to India, haplogroup M frequency in Iran is marginally low (5.3%) and there are no distinguished Iranian-specific sub-clades of haplogroup M. All Iranian haplogroup M lineages can be seen as derived from other regional variants of the haplogroup: eleven show affiliation to haplogroup M lineages found in India, twelve in East and Central Asia (D, G, and M8) and one in northeast Africa (M1).”
“We found that haplogroup M frequency drops abruptly from about 60% in India to about 5% in Iran, marking the western border of the haplogroup M distribution. A similarly sharp border cuts the distribution of Indian-specific mtDNA haplogroups to the east and to the north of the subcontinent. We therefore propose that the initial mtDNA pool established upon the peopling of South Asia has not been replaced but has rather been reshaped in situ by major demographic episodes in the past and garnished by relatively minor events of gene flow both from the West and the East during more recent chapters of the demographic history in the region.”
Thought Writes:
M1 has its highest frequency in Ethiopia and fades out north into the Levant. The fact that the M lineages **overall** reach frequencies of 1.4% in Iraq (Al-Zahery et al http://www.oxfordancestors.com/papers/mtDNA03%20PolymorphismsInIraq.pdf) and less than 6% in Iran (Metspalu et al.) make it likely that M1 in East Africa derive from an ancestral M lineage that spread over from Yemen during the paleolithic era.
On this note it is of interest that Kivisild et al. have discovered a unique new lineage in Yemen labeled L6 that has a TMRCA of 36,600 ky. It is possible that M lineages spread into Ethiopia and L6 spread into Yemen during this period. The fact that M spread into Africa from the southern route (across the Red Sea) and the fact that the most ancient populations of southern Asia invalidate any claims for a "caucasoid" source of M1 in East Africa.
Thought Posts:
Ethiopian mitochondrial DNA heritage: tracking gene flow across and around the gate of tears.
Am J Hum Genet. 2004 Nov;75(5):752-70. Epub 2004 Sep 27.
Kivisild et al.
"The prescence of a frequent founder sequence type of an ancient and as-yet-uncharacterized haplogroup L6 in the Yemeni population, with no haplotype match in the African data base, intriguingly points to a possible early gene flow across the Red Sea or to a signal of gene flow from an African population that has not yet been sampled."
"...the almost complete lack of data from some regions (like Somalia and Kenya), it is possible that the source population of Yemen L6 varieties has not yet been sampled."
[This message has been edited by Thought2 (edited 09 April 2005).]
quote:
Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:M1 has its highest frequency in Ethiopia and fades out north into the Levant. Therefore it is likely that this lineage diverged from an ancestral M lineage that crossed over from Yemen during the paleolithic era. On this note it is of interest that Kivisild et al. note a unique new lineage in Yemen labeled L6 that has a TMRCA of 36,600 ky. It is possible that M lineages spread into Ethiopia during this time and L6 spread to Yemen.
Thought Posts:
Ethiopian mitochondrial DNA heritage: tracking gene flow across and around the gate of tears.
Am J Hum Genet. 2004 Nov;75(5):752-70. Epub 2004 Sep 27.
Kivisild et al.
"The prescence of a frequent founder sequence type of an ancient and as-yet-uncharacterized haplogroup L6 in the Yemeni population, with no haplotype match in the African data base, intriguingly points to a possible early gene flow across the Red Sea or to a signal of gene flow from an African population that has not yet been sampled."
"...the almost complete lack of data from some regions (like Somalia and Kenya), it is possible that the source population of Yemen L6 varieties has not yet been sampled."
About M1
In the absence of a detailed M1 phylogeny, we have focused our attention on M2 to estimate the place of split of M from L3 as Africa or Asia.The deep roots of M phylogeny clearly establish the antiquity of Indian lineages, especially M2, as compared to Ethiopian M1 lineage and hence, support an Asian origin of M majorhaplogroup.
http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1471-2148-5-26.pdf
M1 Still hasn't been proven to be of southwest Asian origin Thought.
We further suggest that as more M1 mt DNA genomes are sequenced, there is a possibility that this lineage might find its root in one of the peripheral branches of Asian M lineage.
Until that is resolved M1 cannot be proven as non-African in origin.
quote:
Originally posted by Topdog:
M1 Still hasn't been proven to be of southwest Asian origin Thought.
Until that is resolved M1 cannot be proven as non-African in origin.
Thought Writes:
T.D., you are absolutely right. The M1 lineage has not been fully delineated. In addition, many populations in Africa remain unstudied. But even if M does turn out to be South Asian instead of East African the lineage would have nothing to do with “Caucasians“.
The low frequency of M lineages in Iran and Iraq imply that there has been some degree of population replacement in these regions.
Thanks for sharing T.D.!
[This message has been edited by Thought2 (edited 09 April 2005).]
quote:
Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:
T.D., you are absolutely right. The M1 lineage has not been fully delineated. In addition, many populations in Africa remain unstudied. But even if M does turn out to be South Asian instead of East African the lineage would have nothing to do with “Caucasians“.
The low frequency of M lineages in Iran and Iraq imply that there has been some degree of population replacement in these regions.Thanks for sharing T.D.!
[This message has been edited by Thought2 (edited 09 April 2005).]
True. Its a wonder that the researchers in that study went around M1 to prove M has an Asian origin. Perhaps M1 is just another L lineage that needs to be cleared up, but true until M1 is conclusively delineated no one can conclude M1 is Asian.