Extinct human known from a skeleton found in 1927 near the French military post of Asselar, French Sudan (now Mali), by M.V. Besnard and Théodore Monod. Asselar man is believed to belong to the Holocene or Recent Epoch; some scholars consider it the oldest known skeleton of an African black.
quote:Originally posted by Evil Euro: A tall, clearly [b]Negroid skeleton (Asselar Man) has been dated to 6500 B.P. (Camp 1974:241; Coon 1962:649-650).
Extinct human known from a skeleton found in 1927 near the French military post of Asselar, French Sudan (now Mali), by M.V. Besnard and Théodore Monod. Asselar man is believed to belong to the Holocene or Recent Epoch; some scholars consider it the oldest known skeleton of an African black.
Now please find the oldest remains of Caucasoids, and don't even think about using Cro-Magnons, they're the fatherest thing from MODERN EUROPEANS. At any rate Iwo Eleru preceded Asselar in West Nigeria
Infect the earliest occupation has been traced by archaeologists to as far back as 65,000 BC Material evidence of human existence has been provided by a skeleton found at Iwo Eleru near Akure in Ondo State dated around 10,000 BC. And the canoe recently excavated at Dunfuna village in Fune local government of Yobe state dated 8000BC and presently at Damaturu in Yobe State capital. http://www.nigerianembassy.hu/facts.html
Still searching for the elusive 'true Negro' to confine him to West Africa?
quote:Originally posted by Evil Euro: A tall, clearly [b]Negroid skeleton (Asselar Man) has been dated to 6500 B.P. (Camp 1974:241; Coon 1962:649-650).
Extinct human known from a skeleton found in 1927 near the French military post of Asselar, French Sudan (now Mali), by M.V. Besnard and Théodore Monod. Asselar man is believed to belong to the Holocene or Recent Epoch; some scholars consider it the oldest known skeleton of an African black.
Euromoron, nothing you says changes the fact that the earliest homo sapiens sapiens in East Africa were akin to modern East Africans like Masai, Tutsi, Hima and Oromo, none of which are Caucasoids, so keep reaching for straws. BTW, Asselar Man wasw found deep in the Sahara, not even any place close to the tropical rain forest where the source you quoted very stupidly say the supposed split between Pygmies and 'True Negroes' allegedly occured. You have a habit of presenting points of evidence that conflict.
posted
The old literature used to make reference to the "Grimaldi Negroids" of Southern Europe. Whatever happened to them? And how are their skeletal structures now defined? How did they get to Europe? Was it by way of the Levant? The old literature dates the Grimaldi to be resident in Europe some 33KYA. COMMENTS? as their existence in Europe relates to Hiernaux's thesis.
I read recently that the cold-adapted--at least 200,000 yeras in Eurasia-- Neanderthals did have speech which would make them fully human but that morphologically they were quite different from the tropical-adapted and Africa-derived types that eventually became Europeans. I noted that the Nenderthals were quite cold-adapted with their stocky builds and the curious fact that they were almost without waists. Given the obsession of some anthropologists with nasal structures it is instructive to note that the nasal structures of the Neanderthals were quite different from that of modern Europeans.
posted
Lamin: Indeed, DNA studies have generally failed to document signficant 'archaic' DNA in modern populations.
Brace, like EuroDisney is looking for a way 'out' of the implications of 'Out of Africa'.
For him the solution is to make Europeans Caucasus-Neanderthalus . For EuroDisney, the solution is to make Europeans 'original' whites of Africa.
Both solutions contain internal contradictions.
Both solutions also contradict each other.
But logic and reason are anathama to people who are driven by bias.
As for Grimaldi man....just another example of early Africans in Europe (of which there are many).
It doesn't really relate to Hiernaux's correct observations about elongated Africans.
Indeed, we are not actually 'debating' Hiernaux or Shomarka Keita's insights on elongated Africans.
What we are doing is 'explaining' it to someone who doesn't like the truth and is looking for a way out.
Carleton Coon believed human beings evolved separately 5 different times. This idea is called polygenesis - more than one origin.
At it most extreme, it is predicated on the notion of different races of human having a different ape ancestor.
Really goofy stuff. And near unanimously rejected by bioanthropologists. Of course this doesn't dissuade the neurotic ethnocentrists who believe that modern science is a poltically correct conspiracy to deny 'racial reality'.
They don't care if their ideas are outdated and have been rejected by modern science, Coon tells them what they want to hear, instead of what they need to know.
That's our job.
[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 05 February 2005).]
I care as much about the appearance of a 100,000+ year-old human as I do about that of Australopithecus. Neither of your examples is a Negro, and the pigmentation is speculative. The fact remains that the Negroid race -- the race to which you belong -- developed in West Africa very recently, and has nothing to do with any OOA migrations.
[This message has been edited by Evil Euro (edited 06 February 2005).]
I care as much about the appearance of a 100,000+ year-old human as I do about that of Australopithecus. Neither of your examples is a Negro, and the pigmentation is speculative. The fact remains that the Negroid race -- the race to which you belong -- developed in West Africa very recently, and has nothing to do with any OOA migrations.[/QUOTE]
quote:Originally posted by Evil Euro: [B] Neither of your examples is a Negro, and the pigmentation is speculative. The fact remains that the Negroid race -- the race to which you belong -- developed in West Africa very recently, and has nothing to do with any OOA migrations.[B]
Thought Writes:
You still have not defined your terms. What is a Negro in a cientific sense? Please do not hide behind superficial definitions.
You still have not defined your terms. What is a Negro in a Scientific sense? Please do not hide behind superficial definitions.
Let's also hold EuroFraud's feet to the fire for dodging Loring Brace statement that Herto man is ancestral to Ethiopian, but NOT to Europeans who Brace views as descendant of Neanderthal - Brace's 'proto-whites'.
And....EuroFraud earlier evokes Gloger's rule to 'explain' the skintone of South Europeans...but now feigns ignorance to the implications for the dark skin tones of pre-historic Africans.
If we took Brace's furry Neanderthal whites, then then cross them with Larry Engel's Negroids from the Nubian Neolithic, would we get something like.....
quote:Originally posted by rasol: Question for EuroDisney.
If we took Brace's furry Neanderthal whites, then then cross them with Larry Engel's Negroids from the Nubian Neolithic, would we get something like.....
Pete Sampras
Curious minds want to know!
Thought Writes:
Sampras would fit in well with many of the creoles from New Orleans.
quote:Originally posted by rasol: Neanderthal is more closely related to modern Europeans - Loring Brace
That's not a fact. It's a theory that has very little evidence to support it. And the theory merely suggests that Europeans may have some Neanderthal ancestry:
"The situation is complicated by the additional presence in Europe, from about 35,000 years ago, of much more modern-looking people known as the Cro-Magnons, who seem to have ultimately originated in Africa. However, experts remain fiercely divided over the question of whether the Neanderthals were replaced by the invading Cro-Magnons, perhaps aggressively or through competition for the same resources, or whether they mixed and mated with each other -- in which case modern Europeans might be partly descended from the Neanderthals."
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
-
Printer-friendly view of this topic