...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
Natufians were cold-adapted
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Kalonji: [QB] [QUOTE] Originally posted by Mindovermatter: How? What are you disqualifying the samples from? Being Natufians? From what it seems, you're trying to establish a specific Natufian phenotype in different eras despite evidence that Natufians arose from two different populations.[/QUOTE]LOL there ARE different phenotypes in different areas, anything wrong with me pointing this out? Sue me. Note that your position is flawed, since it has the underlying assumption that when a population arises from two different sources, they can’t exhibit distinct phenotypes. [QUOTE][i]despite evidence that Natufians arose from two different populations[/i][/QUOTE]Note that now all of a sudden, your ‘’Natufians’’ are a physical blend of features again, instead of a set of cultural features. Let’s go back to what you said in your first post, where you did the EXACT same thing: [QUOTE] Originally posted by Mindovermatter: it's already known that the Natufians albeit clustering phenotypically with niger-congo speakers exhibited more cold adapted limbs than their African counterparts. Btw, note that the Natufian culture is said to have arisen as a result of East Africans (Mushabeans?) moving into southwest Asia and coming together with the indigenous culture there.[/QUOTE]^ Note that both statements are TOTALLY incorrect. Or at least, the last one is still awaiting documentation, specifically of WHEN these Mushabians came in, for you to say they co-created something. The sources I have provided shows the Africans immigrated later. [QUOTE][i]it's already known that the Natufians albeit clustering phenotypically with niger-congo speakers exhibited more cold adapted limbs than their African counterparts.[/i][/QUOTE]What you CLEARLY did is, you took Brace’s sample, and extended it over the Natufians in general, while taking Trentons samples and made that say something about the Natufians in general. And now, when I have provided the sources to show that it is NOT the case that the Natufians are some homogenous group with static facial features of Brace’s resemblance to Niger-Congo speakers, and Trentons relative short limbs, you try to accuse me of ‘’trying to establish a specific Natufian phenotype’’. From what I understood, Truthcentric OP stated that he was unsure about the African nature of certain Natufians, and he took Tentons sample to mean something about these samples that sported African morphology. This is in fact the SAME thing YOU did, as its obvious from your very first post. Hence my attempt to separate the two and make both samples do their own talking, to make sure everyone got the full picture, instead of your weird lumping. Just like for example the Badarian samples do their own talking compared to contemporary lower or upper Egyptian samples. But of course you agree with this, you’re just trying to ‘’be right’’, when you’re NOT. Whats even more laughable, is that Brace’s Natufians sample that clustered somewhat with Niger-Congo speakers was limited to 4 specimens!!! [i]Interestingly enough, however, [b]the small Natufian[/b] sample falls between the Niger-Congo group and the other samples used.[/i] But that didn’t stop you from lumping two osteological measurements without having the slightest idea of what regions these authors got their samples from. Basically, you were just blindly making generalizing statements, not unlike Lioness’s AE mulatto theory when you said: [QUOTE][i]it's already known that the Natufians albeit clustering phenotypically with niger-congo speakers exhibited more cold adapted limbs than their African counterparts.[/i][/QUOTE]^LOL, Natufian mulattoes with faces that resemble Niger Congo speakers and short limbs. HAHAHAHA Your other questions are nothing but laughable attempts to obscure the blunders you made, especially since you make no mention about the fact that you were wrong about the co-creation of Natufian culture, nor did you provide refutation that the African immigrants came when there already existed a population that was called ‘’Natufian’’. Do your authors (Ehret, D 'Agostino) give reverences where they got their co-creation theory from? It seems that the archeologists on the ground, who have had live experience with the skeletons in question have a different story to tell regarding the relative lateness of the skeletons that bear African phenotypes. A story that you have yet to comment on/refute. [/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