...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Deshret
»
Answer to Maestro
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Elmaestro: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Antalas: [qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Elmaestro: Antalas, starting from the Neolithic most North west North African samples that we have with phenotypic data have been predicted to be dark skinned. for example: Neolithic samples of Ifri n Amr Moussa Neolithic samples of Kehf taht el Ghar (Autosomally similar to KEB but slightly more shifted to Iberians) Neolithic sample of Skhirat Chalcholithic sample of Sardinia I merely made an objective statement about available data. [/QUOTE]See ? Now you're backtracking. You mentionned most "[b]post[/b]-neolithic" samples would be dark skinned, but you lack any supporting evidence for this assertion. [QUOTE]Originally posted by Elmaestro: The photo of C represents the range within the interediate skin tone secondary prediction, [URL=http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=15;t=013252;p=1#000018]I noted this to you and Brandon before[/URL]. D is a skin tone that is certainly considered black by most. What are you trying to do here? The North African samples as you note were dark to black, which is D or darker. Most Afram for example have a skin tone similar to D. [/QUOTE]Hahaha Ok you're just trolling at this point XD If that's considered black then 3/4 of North Africans are "black" if not darker than Afro-americans. These typical North Africans below would be lighter than the "dark to black" prediction of Hirisplex ? [IMG]https://i.imgur.com/cH0SZv6.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]https://i.imgur.com/CbJfa3a.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]https://i.imgur.com/clCRnE7.jpg[/IMG] "Dark to Black" is way too broad and inaccurate. [QUOTE]Originally posted by Elmaestro: You made this thread in response to me saying you should advocate autochthonous ancestry regardless of there skin color. You were the one making a big deal about the skin color of Seti I. If it's trivial, stop bitching about it. [/QUOTE]And I repeatedly told you that skin color didn't matter and even highlighted the presence of indigenous black North Africans in the Sahara. Regarding Seti I, my response was simply a reaction to incorrect statements. It is actually you who seems to get easily provoked, as usual, and your consistent focus on the phenotypic data from those studies is quite telling. [QUOTE]Originally posted by Elmaestro: It is possible they had that skin tone but that ideal is still conjecture. I can look at that reconstruction and tell that their influence was pulled from populations who do carry derived skin tone alleles, though darkened either due to heterogeniety and environment. Just compare the reconstruction to living individuals/populations and double check the available genotypes for said populations/individuals. Nonetheless [URL=http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=15;t=013246;p=1#000019]These skin tones are also probable[/URL]. You can check which living populations carry their phenotype (for pigmentation) and see if there's genotypic correspondence. It's just a simple flow of logic. Also Pleistocene diversity has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Epipaleolithic samples were almost completely irrelevant here to begin with. [/QUOTE]That doesn't make sense because in order to make such a comparison, you would need to consider a population that has evolved in a similar environment to Mediterranean NW Africa for thousands of years and lacks the specific alleles you are referring to. I am not aware of any present-day African population that fits this particular scenario (except maybe some communities of Khoisans in Southern Africa but I'm not sure). [QUOTE]Originally posted by Elmaestro: This isn't an example of arguing semantics it's just another example of a lack of comprehension. I don't think modern African Americans look that much like any of those samples (maybe excluding Qurmurian). You just don't try to understand. I believe African Americans particularly those with Iberian ancestry can definitely overlap with more recent ancient North Africans in terms of physical appearance. The pleistocene samples are quite divergent. [/qb][/QUOTE]I already told you to refrain from using the excuse of "English skill" or comprehension when you lack arguments. Your current statement is based solely on speculation, and using such reasoning, one could also claim that North European skulls might exhibit an extreme deviation in the distribution of African American variation. Remember the concept of the "one-drop rule"? I mean seriously wtf is this : "I believe African Americans particularly those with Iberian ancestry" Please stop resorting to desperate measures as it is becoming rather pitiful. [/QB][/QUOTE]Now, you're basically sating a bunch of nothing. You're getting emotional. You made this thread in response to me critiquing your assessment on skin color. It matters to you or this wouldn't be a thread. you really can't tell Sample D is exposed to light? Yes, those people you posted especially the men would have a higher secondary estimate for the intermediate skin color phenotype. I'm not blaming your lack of comprehension on your language btw. There's something else keeping you from understanding simple concepts. Also have you not read a single study on the morphological variance in African Americans? can you honestly say that the lady you posted can represent an Ancient NA but no Afram can? Just reread my posts starting from the beginning. (besides the "post"-neolithic) my stance has been consistent. And try to understand what I'm saying. [/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