...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
The analysis of racial structure of early dynastic populations in Egypt
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Swenet: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: There are disqualifying traits for all types - Caucasoid: facial flatness, wide nose; Negroid: large brow-ridges, thin nose. etc.[/QUOTE]Pseudo-science. The basis for these confused statements are founded on your assumption that there is something out of the ordinary when present populations aren't identical to their ancestral predecessors. In itself, this wouldn't be as much of a retarded thing to subscribe to, were it not for your entirely willful cherry picking when it comes to establishing what features are ''disqualifying traits'' for which racial type. Even though I've asked you numerous times, you've been totally at a loss, and in denial of your utter loss and befuddlement, when it comes to your glaring inability to answer the simple question why traits like rectangular eye sockets, wide mandibular rami, wide broad interorbital breadths and other traits, like rates of ~65% occipital buns in Western Eurasian AMHs aren't disqualifying traits for their Caucasoid status, even though the aforementioned traits are much more genetically controlled than brow ridges, which are just associated with robusticity, and hence, they decrease in frequency when populations become more gracile due to lifestyle induced changes: [i]As discussed at the beginning of this chapter, the foods we eat and the manner in which they are prepared [b]tremendously infl uence our physical appearance.[/b] The relationship between food and morphology is well illustrated by the major anatomical changes throughout human evolution. As discussed in chapter 9, [b]the massiveness of the late australopithecines’ face and jaws was clearly linked to the hard foods those hominids ate, such as seeds.[/b] Generating the power to chew hard foods required large masticatory muscles [b](and their boney support).[/b] Thus, the welldeveloped sagittal crests of some later australopithecines—such as Australopithecus aethiopicus—are adaptations related to chewing. Over the course of human evolution [b]following the australopithecines, the face and jaws have continuously reduced in size and robusticity, refl ecting a general decrease in the demand placed on the jaws and teeth as culture became increasingly complex and foodstuffs changed.[/b][/i] --Essentials of physical anthropology: discovering our origins, Clark Spencer Larsen. [QUOTE]Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: [b]Horners are prognathic to orthognathic. There are different race types there.[/b] The Caucasoids tend to be in the higher castes, who are orthognathic, Negroids in the lower (although there are exceptions).[/QUOTE]All populations are prognathic to orthognathic. Try again, jackass. Your response has nothing to do with my post. Tip: try to actually address what someone says, for a change: [i]I don't recall saying anything about the accuracy of the identifications (even though issues loom over this aspect of his analysis as well), [b]but rather, your acceptance of the fabricated characterization of Cushitic speaking Horners as Meso-Prognathic, while more prognathic Nordics and Lapps are described as ortochnathous in your post. Again, what does race, typology or sorting have to do with the above, other than that its just a ploy to divert attention away from the fact that you're utterly failing to back up your claim that Cushitic speaking Horners are outside of the European range when it comes to prognathism.[/b][/i] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: There's no racial types in that study.[/QUOTE]You've used that study to attempt to show how much prognathism Negroids have, you've attempted to use it to show how large the Caucasoid component in Ancient Egypt was, you've used it to show the low frequency of infra-glabellar notch in Africans--basically, you've used it for every Euronut purpose under the sun. But when I use it to show how false your description of the ''Berberic'' category is, all of a sudden there are ''no racial types'' in that study, and the goal post gets shifted to the need for at least ''10 variables''. I then ask you how you've managed to come to the conclusion that various Palaeolithic (North) African remains were distinct from modern day Niger-Congo speakers, in the absence of a 10+ variable study that confirmed your position. This then caused you to panic and jump the sinking ship of your earlier goal post shift, re: the 10 variables you said you needed to sort craniums. Now you're back full circle with your circular reasoning (literally), i.e., back to your retarded 1 variable Anthropology. SMH at this phuckin' clown. [/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