...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Deshret
»
The Mechta-Afalou/Mechtoids redux thread
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by The Explorer: [QB] ^If there's something slightly different from what was mentioned in the last topic on this subject, it might be this... [QUOTE]Originally posted by The Explorer: [IMG]http://img363.imageshack.us/img363/7140/10yl24mcopyph9.jpg[/IMG] Speaking of which—with regards to the Afalou‘s being “neither Negroid or San”, on the other hand, from Groves,... [i][b]factor 2 represents the **sub-Saharan/Caucasoid** contrast[/b]. The [b]Caucasoid populations[/b] (Egypt, Norse, Cro-Magnon) [b]score positively on factor 2[/b], the [b]sub-Saharan[/b] Teita [b]score negatively[/b]. The [b]modern Dogon[/b] (Southern Mali) samples [b]are intermediate[/b]. The fossil Nubians score strongly negative, as does the Asselar skull (Central Mali). What is [b]especially interesting is that Afalou also scores negatively[/b], if only slightly; it [b]occupies the same morphological position as do the modern Dogon[/b].[/i] Recap, [from previous Egyptsearch & blog notes]: So, a Maghrebian specimen, namely the Afalou specimens, occupy the same position as the "modern Dogon" [although a Dogon male scores positively]...[/QUOTE]Here, the author is saying that the: [i]the [b]most ancient[/b], i.e. [b]those from Taforalt[/b] in Morocco, [b]Afalou-bou-Rhummel[/b] in Algeria and [b]Singa[/b] in the Sudan, [b]cannot be considered as being either Negro or San[/b], whereas the [b]later[/b] Jebel Sahaba sample (c. 12000 B.P.), the Wadi Halfa (c. 11950 - 6400 B.P.) and the Mechta-el-Arbi individuals (c. 8500 B.P.) and the Jebel Moya sample (c. 2950 - 2350 B.P.) are [b]not significantly removed from the Negro populations[/b].[/i] And the author goes onto say... [i]Apart from the Mechta 3 individual, they are also [b]not significantly removed from the San male population[/b], but the Jebel Sahaba and the Jebel Moya males and the Jebel Sahaba 8905 individual are all significantly different from the San female population.[/i] Here the Afalou cannot supposedly be considered as being either Negro or San, but according to Grove's factor analysis, cited in my post above, the Afalou specimens reported negatively on factor 2, which is supposed to represent [i]"Sub-Saharan/Caucasoid contrast"[/i], Lol. Presumably according to this factor analysis, those specimens that reported 'positively' on factor 2, were in the "caucasoid" camp, while those that reported 'negatively', were in the "sub-Saharan" camp. And so, it also follows, interestingly, that Groves' Dogon male specimen would qualify as a "caucasoid", even if supposedly to a relatively lesser degree than his Taforalt and Cro-Magnon specimens for example. Interestingly though, Groves preferred to refer to his Dogon and Afalou specimens as being "intermediate". But we all know about Grove's reactionary "racial" concepts, don't we. :) [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3