posted
Lionness dont you sleep at night .Go to sleep.Whats the deal with young Nicole Kidman.
Egmond Codfried Member # 15683
posted
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
Most famous blondes did not start out as blond. Her hair is very curly, recent Black ancestor? Aboriginal?
Oshun Member # 19740
posted
its curly but not as curly as many blacks in say the US.
Crush Black Lies Member # 20324
posted
^Blacks do not have curly hair. They have tightly spiraled hair.
Oshun Member # 19740
posted
Quiet Cassi sockpuppet. No one asked for your limited experiences with blacks. It will never trump the experiences of a person whose actually black and has far more experience. I even showed you a Nigerian who had hair that was not tightly spiraled (which is really just a way of saying very tight CURL). You use old references or dated interpretations of old books to attempt easing your lack of experience of the world. Why do you even bother going on this account anymore? Everyone knows you're just talking to yourself.
Anglo_Pyramidologist Member # 18853
posted
quote:Originally posted by Crush Black Lies: ^Blacks do not have curly hair. They have tightly spiraled hair.
Their self-hatred drives them to confuse "curly" with wooly (ulotrichous). Yet, there is a huge difference between the two. Curly hair is a variant of cymotrichous, wavy, not wooly - and is Caucasoid. Wooly hair is strictly Negroid, although it also arose in some non-related Melanesian populations.
Crush Black Lies Member # 20324
posted
A_P, if you have that illustration depicting the hair types, can you post it up and educate some of these fools.
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist:
quote:Originally posted by Crush Black Lies: ^Blacks do not have curly hair. They have tightly spiraled hair.
Their self-hatred drives them to confuse "curly" with wooly (ulotrichous). Yet, there is a huge difference between the two. Curly hair is a variant of cymotrichous, wavy, not wooly - and is Caucasoid. Wooly hair is strictly Negroid, although it also arose in some non-related Melanesian populations.
Oshun Member # 19740
posted
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist:
quote:Originally posted by Crush Black Lies: ^Blacks do not have curly hair. They have tightly spiraled hair.
Their self-hatred drives them to confuse "curly" with wooly (ulotrichous). Yet, there is a huge difference between the two. Curly hair is a variant of cymotrichous, wavy, not wooly - and is Caucasoid. Wooly hair is strictly Negroid, although it also arose in some non-related Melanesian populations.
Again I've already shown you west Africans with no mixture with Europeans that have "curly" hair. It is also a variant of AFRICAN hair, and does not require European mixture. Additionally I never said there was anything wrong with wooly hair. I think it's cute too. So you are WRONG and STOP talking to your sock puppet.
Anglo_Pyramidologist Member # 18853
posted
quote:Originally posted by Crush Black Lies: A_P, if you have that illustration depicting the hair types, can you post it up and educate some of these fools.
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist:
quote:Originally posted by Crush Black Lies: ^Blacks do not have curly hair. They have tightly spiraled hair.
Their self-hatred drives them to confuse "curly" with wooly (ulotrichous). Yet, there is a huge difference between the two. Curly hair is a variant of cymotrichous, wavy, not wooly - and is Caucasoid. Wooly hair is strictly Negroid, although it also arose in some non-related Melanesian populations.
I have a smaller version of it -
As you can see, curly falls under cymotrichous (wavy), while Negroid is strictly ulotrichous.
Crush Black Lies Member # 20324
posted
^Perfect! thanks! Now lets see these fools refute that!
Oshun Member # 19740
posted
Why do I give a fvck about a subjective range for hair? And even if it WERE objective, I already gave you a youtube vid of a Nigerian. I think I'd given you a few in the past of Nigerians and other West Africans. You and your sock puppet already HAVE been refuted. West Africans CAN have more than one curl pattern. Why do you think that chart refutes what people can actually GO to West Africa and find?! Textbooks cannot always replace REAL experience. You dont refuse to associate with the black community and THEN act like you can refute people who will and know far more than you or the old researchers you cite.
mena7 Member # 20555
posted
Nikole Kindman curly hair mean she had a black ancestor on her family history. I think one of the biggest secret of European is that some European people are bleach black.The secret is in their DNA.Their ancestor were black or mulato in classical time or the middle age .Those black ancestor later mixed with pale European or Central Asian .
Oshun Member # 19740
posted
didnt Cassi or one of his sockpuppets post in the past something about 1/3rd American whites having some black ancestors? Lol.
Egmond Codfried Member # 15683
posted
I was looking for a nude shot to determine her pubic hair, but found this. Strange lips. She no beautiful here. The keyword is RECENT Black ancestor.
She could be mistaken here for a nigra and the poor Black guy would be lynched too...
Can an American please explain this type to me. What are we dealing with here? And lips too.
the lioness Member # 17353
posted
^^^ you need somebody to racially categorize for you?
Troll Patrol Member # 18264
posted
quote:Originally posted by mena7: Nikole Kindman curly hair mean she had a black ancestor on her family history. I think one of the biggest secret of European is that some European people are bleach black.The secret is in their DNA.Their ancestor were black or mulato in classical time or the middle age .Those black ancestor later mixed with pale European or Central Asian .
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: didnt Cassi or one of his sockpuppets post in the past something about 1/3rd American whites having some black ancestors? Lol.
The number was 88 million.
quote:Dr. Rick A Kittles
The graph also depicts another variable, one that is of interest to the historian—endogamous group membership or ethnic self-identity. Each dot in the chart is encoded to show whether the person sampled claimed to be a member of the U.S. White endogamous group (diamond shape, 187 individuals) or of the U.S. Black endogamous group (open circle, 232 individuals). (The x-shaped plots represent a population of British West Indian ethnicity living in London.12) The graph refers to these three groups as European American, African American, and African Caribbean, respectively, and the text explains that this trait was self-assessed and independent of actual genetics.
With this added information, three aspects of the scatter diagram suddenly jump out at you. First, there is significant overlap between White and Black Americans regarding Afro-European genetic admixture. Some so-called “Black” Americans have less DNA admixture of African ancestral origin than do some so-called “White” Americans. Second, the admixture range of Black Americans spans the entire chart. While most of the subjects who self-identify as Black (marked as circles) have strong African admixture (are found towards the right), some have little or no African admixture (are found at the left edge). Finally, although the range of genetic admixture in those who self-identify as “White” is narrower than the admixture range of Blacks, it is still significant. Many so-called “White” Americans have as much as 20 percent or more of African genetic admixture.
The next graph, “Afro-European Genetic Admixture as a Function of Ethnicity” below, was taken from a different study. It also matches ancestral continent-of-origin genetic admixture for several hundred individuals with their ethnic self-identity or endogamous group membership.
Dr. Shriver
Genetic Admixture is not the Same as Appearance
About one-third of White Americans are of between two and twenty percent recent African genetic admixture, as measured by the ancestry-informative markers in their DNA.19 This comes to about 74 million Americans. And yet, day-to-day experience teaches that virtually all White Americans look, well, White. Some may look more Mediterranean and others may look more Nordic, but very few White Americans have a distinctively African appearance. How can one reconcile DNA measurements with common experience?An anecdote may help illustrate the problem. Look again at the chart of Skin Tone as Function of Afro-European Admixture. Consider one of the graph’s outlier points—a “European American” individual plotted as having 11 percent20 African genetic admixture. Dr. Shriver, the project team leader, became curious about this individual for two reasons. First, the person’s African genetic admixture was unusually high for someone who self-identified as a member of the U.S. White endogamous group. Second, the sample had been taken from State College, Pennsylvania, the site of Dr. Shriver’s own campus.21 According to Dr. Shriver:
I had the result for two or three years before I even looked up the ID number of the person whom we tested. I looked at who it was and it was me! I checked myself and the rest of my relatives and tracked it through my family. I never considered that there were any African people in my family. There’s no real variation in my family. The admixture must have been pretty far back. It just so happens that we can detect it with the markers we have. My mom especially stood out as being surprised, maybe because I told her it was coming through her father. She still doesn’t believe it about her family! The part of Pennsylvania where my mother’s father came from is where the Underground Railroad ended. There are several towns right here in Southern Pennsylvania where there are very light-skinned African-American communities that are the remnants of the Underground Railroad.22
οὐλόϑριξ
ulotrichous [juːˈlɒtrɪkəs] adj (Life Sciences & Allied Applications / Biology) having woolly or curly hair
[from New Latin Ulotrichī (classification applied to humans having this type of hair), from Greek oulothrix, from oulos curly + thrix hair] ulotrichy n
The graph also depicts another variable, one that is of interest to the historian—endogamous group membership or ethnic self-identity. Each dot in the chart is encoded to show whether the person sampled claimed to be a member of the U.S. White endogamous group (diamond shape, 187 individuals) or of the U.S. Black endogamous group (open circle, 232 individuals). (The x-shaped plots represent a population of British West Indian ethnicity living in London.12) The graph refers to these three groups as European American, African American, and African Caribbean, respectively, and the text explains that this trait was self-assessed and independent of actual genetics.
With this added information, three aspects of the scatter diagram suddenly jump out at you. First, there is significant overlap between White and Black Americans regarding Afro-European genetic admixture. Some so-called “Black” Americans have less DNA admixture of African ancestral origin than do some so-called “White” Americans. Second, the admixture range of Black Americans spans the entire chart. While most of the subjects who self-identify as Black (marked as circles) have strong African admixture (are found towards the right), some have little or no African admixture (are found at the left edge). Finally, although the range of genetic admixture in those who self-identify as “White” is narrower than the admixture range of Blacks, it is still significant. Many so-called “White” Americans have as much as 20 percent or more of African genetic admixture.
The next graph, “Afro-European Genetic Admixture as a Function of Ethnicity” below, was taken from a different study. It also matches ancestral continent-of-origin genetic admixture for several hundred individuals with their ethnic self-identity or endogamous group membership.
Dr. Shriver
Genetic Admixture is not the Same as Appearance
About one-third of White Americans are of between two and twenty percent recent African genetic admixture, as measured by the ancestry-informative markers in their DNA.19 This comes to about 74 million Americans. And yet, day-to-day experience teaches that virtually all White Americans look, well, White. Some may look more Mediterranean and others may look more Nordic, but very few White Americans have a distinctively African appearance. How can one reconcile DNA measurements with common experience?An anecdote may help illustrate the problem. Look again at the chart of Skin Tone as Function of Afro-European Admixture. Consider one of the graph’s outlier points—a “European American” individual plotted as having 11 percent20 African genetic admixture. Dr. Shriver, the project team leader, became curious about this individual for two reasons. First, the person’s African genetic admixture was unusually high for someone who self-identified as a member of the U.S. White endogamous group. Second, the sample had been taken from State College, Pennsylvania, the site of Dr. Shriver’s own campus.21 According to Dr. Shriver:
I had the result for two or three years before I even looked up the ID number of the person whom we tested. I looked at who it was and it was me! I checked myself and the rest of my relatives and tracked it through my family. I never considered that there were any African people in my family. There’s no real variation in my family. The admixture must have been pretty far back. It just so happens that we can detect it with the markers we have. My mom especially stood out as being surprised, maybe because I told her it was coming through her father. She still doesn’t believe it about her family! The part of Pennsylvania where my mother’s father came from is where the Underground Railroad ended. There are several towns right here in Southern Pennsylvania where there are very light-skinned African-American communities that are the remnants of the Underground Railroad.22
posted 
