posted 21 January 2005 08:31 AM            

=======================================

"[T]he major genetic differentiation axis in the Mediterranean basin is a north-south axis [which] clearly differentiates the North African and Middle Eastern populations from the European populations. ... As expected, the highest distances are shown by the European-North African comparisons [while] the lowest genetic distances correspond to intra-European comparisons."

Kandil et al. (1999) Red cell enzyme polymorphisms in Moroccans and southern Spaniards: New data for the genetic history of the western Mediterranean. Hum Biol; 71:791-802

=======================================

"Within the European cluster there is a tight grouping containing Sicily (South Italy), Italy (from all mainland), Germany, Holland, Hungary, Lombardy (North Italy) and Tuscany (Centre Italy)."

Ghiani et al. (2004) Y-chromosome 10 locus short tandem repeat haplotypes in a population sample from Sicily Italy. Leg Med; 2:89-96

=======================================

Vona et al. (2001) Mitochondrial DNA sequence analysis in Sicily. Am J Hum Biol; 13:576-589

=======================================

Nasidze et al. (2003) Testing hypotheses of language replacement in the Caucasus: evidence from the Y-chromosome. Hum Genet; 112:255-61

=======================================

Ayub et al. (2003) Reconstruction of human evolutionary tree using polymorphic autosomal microsatellites. Am J Phys Anthropol; 122:259-68

=======================================

Hammer et al. (2000) Jewish and Middle Eastern non-Jewish Populations Share a Common Pool of Y-chromosome Biallelic Haplotypes. Proc Natl Acad Sci; 97:6769-6774

=======================================

posted 21 January 2005 10:17 AM            

quote:

---

That joker thinks that Southern Europeans are akin to Africans and Middle Easterners, more so than they are to other Europeans.

---

Perhaps you wish to retract your race purity claims, since you are evidently no longer willing to defend them?

posted 21 January 2005 10:45 AM            

This comment shows the same stubborn ignorance with regards to genetics as you have prior demonstrated with regards to physical anthropology.

Once more:

Haplotypes relate 'genotype' and not phenotype. The idea that genes can be classified as negroid or caucasoid is therefor a non sequitor. The only one asserting that fallacy is you, your attempt at 'disproof' is of little use to you.

EuroDisney, don't try to deflect by making up straw arguments.

* Either defend your contention of southern European racial purity......

or disprove the evidence for African admixture into southern Europes heterogeneous population.

Here, I will help by reminding you of what is is that you are specifically supposed to be disproving:

Arredi: On the basis of these data, we suggest that cluster E-M78 (E3b) was involved in a first dispersal of E-M78 chromosomes from eastern Africa into northern Africa and the Near East - a population expansion involving E3b2-M81 is believed to have occurred in northwestern Africa.

Cruciani:
“The relatively young TMRCA (mutation divergence date) of 5.6 ky for haplography E-M81 and the lack of differentiation between European and African heliotypes in the network of E-M81 support the hypothesis of RECENT gene flow between northwestern Africa and Iberia.”

Recent gene flow -> East Africa to NorthWest Africa, to Europe.

Please address in terms of genetics, not caucasoid contrivances and negroid non-sequitors, and other nonsense terms you use to hide from unpleasant facts. Thank you.

posted 21 January 2005 11:00 AM            

quote:

---

Um, of course the Egyptians today are genetically different than black Africans because they're mostly arabs. I'd like to see the test results of more ancient samples.

---

There are few genetic studies on ancient Kemetian remains. It is however possible to infer some facts regarding their origin from current populations, as addressed in prior threads:
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/Forum8/HTML/001100.html

quote:

---

Thought writes:

The Model For The Peopling Of The Egyptian Nile
1) North Africans and all non-Africans descend from a Sub-Saharan East African background.

Tishkoff et al.

2) Sub-Saharan East Africa is in tropical Africa.

3) Glogger’s Rule indicates that Sub-Saharan East Africans would be dark skinned.

4) Humans traveled out of Africa via the Nile Valley, settling along the way.

Luis et al. 2004

5) The most recent wave out of Sub-Saharan East Africa occurred during the early Holocene. This is supported in the genetic record (E-M78), archaeological record (micro-burins and grind stones), linguistics (Afro-Asiatic language origin in Horn and spread TO Eurasia), and skeletal remains (“Negroid” nasal and mouth forms in Neolithic Greece).

6) Population size was larger in Africa than elsewhere prior to the Neolithic period. Hence the direction of the population feed between Africa and Eurasia would be mainly one going FROM Africa to Eurasia.

Source:

Relethford, J.H. and Jorde, L.B. (1999) Genetic evidence for larger African population size during recent human evolution. Am. J. Phys. Anthrop., 108, 251–260.

7) This early Holocene migration from Sub-Saharan East Africa was the main source of the peopling of Egypt and the Maghreb with some spill over into the Fertile Crescent and the Aegean.

Keita et al. 2004

8) The Natufians of the Levant had genetic characteristics and physical features that linked them with East Africans. Hence any back migration from this region would have brought populations that resembled East Africans back into Africa!

9) The two main genetic clusters found in Modern Egypt are Haplogroups E (E-M2, E-M78 and E-M81) and J-M267. The E clusters are all originate within Sub-Saharan East Africa or Central Africa. E-M81 derived from the ancestral East African E-M35 lineage that spread to North Africa along with E-M78 during the early Holocene. J-M267 is derived from the Arab invasion. Hence f we deduct J-M267 from the pool that would have existed during the Pharonic period we can see that the Ancient Egyptians were primarily of a early Holocene East African origin.

---

posted 21 January 2005 12:15 PM            

Point is that "genetic distance" is a function of "geographical distance" with East Africa as the unique Archimidean point of human origins. But once this is recognised the "sub-Saharan" model(a euphemism for the racially founded Eurocentric category "black Africa")collapses.

After all, the geographical distance betweens between East Africans(Kenyans, Ugandans, Tanzanians, Ethiopians, Somalis) is much, much less than between Senegalese and South Africans of Zulu ancestry, say.

posted 21 January 2005 12:36 PM            

Notice this particular set of cartoon drawings clusters Ethiopia with Egypt, separates North Africa from Europe, as one would expect from South European chauvenists.

Other studies (no more or less valid), cluster NorthWest Africa WITH Southern Europe and distinct from the Middle East (Amazingh Nationalism).

As far as Africans go, it is fact that the majority of the human genome is of African origin...where human beings originated and have lived and evolved (almost exclusively)for the majority of our collective history.

Hence naturally there us more genetic diversity (and therefore distance) WITHIN Africa than in all of Eurasia. And it follows from this, that you can 'go to town' with genetic distance maps.

It's easy to find great genetic distance and variation within African populations.

My reaction to the different and contradictory genetic distance diagrams is usually..... And? They seldom show what their proponents claim. [hence the non-sequitor 'commentary' made by EuroDisney]

posted 21 January 2005 01:48 PM            

One also needs the whole report to know the statistics of the
samples, i.e., provenance, number of samples, relationship of donors.

For these and other reasons genetic maps will yield varying conclusions
even when addressing the same populations. Nonetheless they are
very useful when taken within the proper context of the reports
they come from knowing the limited genes under examination.

To my knowledge, no one has produced a study with maps that rely
on all known useful genes involving all nearly distinct
populations on earth where each population has contributions from
a sample size of at least 50 and no oversampling from any one
population. As such all reports are limited to the precise groups sampled
and no results can be extrapulated to apply to a generic region or
continent where members of such region or continent remain outside the
samples.

Precision is the keyword.

posted 21 January 2005 06:25 PM            

First, I don't know of any regular poster here who approaches matters from a scientific or linguistic(Wally) standpoint whose contributions could be reduced to fervent moral criticisms of Western behaviour.

Second, it is "rational critique" that pushes the boundaries of knowledge forward. Science is different from other intellectual endeavours in that its relentless critique of received doctrine is what saves it and gives it prestige.

Third, it is just this kind of hard, logical critique that puts pressure on the received doctrines in anthropology, genetics, history, etc. as they apply to egyptology in particular and its relationship to Africa in general.

posted 21 January 2005 08:16 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
[B]Hammer et al. (2000) Jewish and Middle Eastern non-Jewish Populations Share a Common Pool of Y-chromosome Biallelic Haplotypes. Proc Natl Acad Sci; 97:6769-6774[B]

---

Thought Posts From The Same Study:
http://www.familytreedna.com/pdf/HammerPNAS_2000.pdf

"The second most frequent Jewish haplotype, YAP+ haplotype 4, was common in Middle Eastern and southern European populations and reached its highest frequency in North Africa. The discovery of its precursor (YAP+ haplotype 4L) in seven Ethiopian males supports the hypothesis that the YAP+ haplotype 4S originated on a YAP+ 4L chromosome in Ethiopia (20,000 years ago), where it likely increased in frequency before spreading down the Nile River toward Egypt and the Levant (32). This hypothesis is consistent with mtDNA evidence indicating south-to-north gene flow down the Nile (45).

The presence of three haplotypes at very low frequencies (0.3-1.5%) in Jewish and Middle Eastern non-Jewish populations (1A, 3A, and YAP+ 5) may be explained by low levels of gene flow from sub-Saharan African populations. This conclusion is consistent with the observed presence of low frequencies of African mtDNA haplotypes in Jewish populations (16)."

posted 21 January 2005 08:30 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Posts From The Same Study:
http://www.familytreedna.com/pdf/HammerPNAS_2000.pdf

"The second most frequent Jewish haplotype, YAP+ haplotype 4, was common in Middle Eastern and southern European populations and reached its highest frequency in North Africa. The discovery of its precursor (YAP+ haplotype 4L) in seven Ethiopian males supports the hypothesis that the YAP+ haplotype 4S originated on a YAP+ 4L chromosome in Ethiopia (20,000 years ago), where it likely increased in frequency before spreading down the Nile River toward Egypt and the Levant (32). This hypothesis is consistent with mtDNA evidence indicating south-to-north gene flow down the Nile (45).

The presence of three haplotypes at very low frequencies (0.3-1.5%) in Jewish and Middle Eastern non-Jewish populations (1A, 3A, and YAP+ 5) may be explained by low levels of gene flow from sub-Saharan African populations. This conclusion is consistent with the observed presence of low frequencies of African mtDNA haplotypes in Jewish populations (16)."

---

Basic geography has eluded someone again, in the midst of these studies: the notion that Ethiopia isn't sub-Saharan.

posted 22 January 2005 06:58 AM            

Y-chromosome and mitochondrial DNA genealogies are especially interesting because they demonstrate the lack of concordance of lineages with morphology and facilitate a phylogenetic analysis. Individuals with the same morphology do not necessarily cluster with each other by lineage, and a given lineage does not include only individuals with the same trait complex (or 'racial type'). Y-chromosome DNA from Africa alone suffices to make this point. Africa contains populations whose members have a range of external phenotypes. This variation has usually been described in terms of 'race' (Caucasoids, Pygmoids, Congoids, Khoisanoids). But the Y-chromosome clade defined by the PN2 transition (PN2/M35, PN2/M2) shatters the boundaries of phenotypically defined races and true breeding populations across a great geographical expanse. African peoples with a range of skin colors, hair forms and physiognomies have substantial percentages of males whose Y chromosomes form closely related clades with each other, but not with others who are phenotypically similar. The individuals in the morphologically or geographically defined 'races' are not characterized by 'private' distinct lineages restricted to each of them.

http://www.nature.com/cgi-taf/DynaPage.taf?file=/ng/journal/v36/n11s/full/ng1455.html

posted 22 January 2005 07:33 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasshole:
Notice this particular set of cartoon drawings clusters Ethiopia with Egypt, separates North Africa from Europe, as one would expect from South European chauvenists.

---

^^^^^ Whiny baby who can't accept the facts.

quote:

---

If you look at enough of these maps, you will notice that depending on the agenda it is very easy to produce contradictory information by selective sampling.

---

Ha ha ha! Six different maps from six independent studies that all yield the same results. Yeah, very "selective".

quote:

---

The idea that genes can be classified as negroid or caucasoid is therefor a non sequitor

---

Nonsense. The most contemporary geneticists are doing just that. Look at the study on Ethiopians that I destroyed you with in the other thread:

http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/AJHG/journal/issues/v62n2/970077/970077.html

Also, see this recent study which shows that genetic clusters correlate with traditionally defined racial categories:

posted 22 January 2005 07:41 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
Funny that Evil Euro still talks about genes being Negroid and Caucasoid when the notion of connecting genes with physical traits has already been exploded...

---

Then why are you Afro-freaks trying to link E3b with Negroid traits? Hypocrites.

quote:

---

Speaking of maps, I guess evil Euro forgot this map, look where East Africans group and where Berbers group....

---

posted 22 January 2005 07:46 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by King_Scorpion:
Um, of course the Egyptians today are genetically different than black Africans because they're mostly arabs. I'd like to see the test results of more ancient samples.

---

OK, here you go:

Genetics of Ancient Egyptians

Scientists at the University of Cairo tested DNA from the remains of pyramid workers from 2600 BC, and found that the DNA of ancient Egyptians matches that of modern Egyptians. That is, the people living in Egypt now are essentially the same as the people living there thousands of years ago. (Read an excerpt from PBS's Secrets of the Pharaohs)

posted 22 January 2005 08:30 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
'East African' can refer to anything from Ethiopia to Mozambique. Likewise, 'Berber' can include Caucasoid northern groups or hybrid southern groups. Those categories are too broad and not very informative. But the map does strengthen my point about Southern Europeans (Italians and Greeks), so thanks.

---

Who attempted to link genes with Negroid traits? LOL, you're the one linking genes and traits, you implied it with your reference to that post of Dienekes'. You started it off by saying E3b isn't Negroid. Look at your site, you imply genes are rqual to traits whereas my argument was against it. I demonstrated this with my post on east African anthropometric means. The hypocrite is your dumbass, not me. Just as East African can mean anything, so can Northeast African and sub-Saharan Africans. In this case you're wrong because it mentions Nilo-Saharans, bantu and East African so go figure. You're the one that can't take the facts, you contradict yourself.

posted 22 January 2005 08:34 AM            

quote:

---

Then why are you Afro-freaks trying to link E3b with Negroid traits?

---

So don't be so defensive. Only a neurotically obsessive ethnophobe feels a need to deny the reality of biological diversity.

quote:

---

Whiny baby who can't accept the facts.

---

posted 22 January 2005 08:40 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
OK, here you go:

[b]Genetics of Ancient Egyptians

Scientists at the University of Cairo tested DNA from the remains of pyramid workers from 2600 BC, and found that the DNA of ancient Egyptians matches that of modern Egyptians. That is, the people living in Egypt now are essentially the same as the people living there thousands of years ago. (Read an excerpt from PBS's Secrets of the Pharaohs)

http://www.geocities.com/enbp/genetics.html[/B]

---

I don't see anything being proven in that link. All I see is a quote from Hawass who is the most unreliable man on the race of the AE to date. Of course he is going to say what he passionatly believes...he's getting paid for it! People have always used this as proof, but to this day NO ONE has seen the actual results that they claim to have found on the pyramid builders! And don't you think if it was so definite then they would release it? HEEELL YEA!!!!!

posted 22 January 2005 10:25 AM            

PN2 Haplotypes are still preponderant in Upper Egypt and Nubia. The present day Nile Delta shows a preponderance of non indigenous Eurasian haplotypes introduced by Asiatic and European populations [Hyksos, Syrians, Asiatic Arabs, Greeks).

3 adjacent clines along the Egyptian Nile:
A - Delta
B - Upper Egypt
C - Nubia

posted 23 January 2005 08:35 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
You are quoting Hawass EuroDisney .

He is not a geneticist.

---

posted 23 January 2005 08:45 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
We are only stating the facts of the tropical east African origins of E3b male chromosome, and the penetration of African male populations into Southern Europe in historic times

---

No, you're trying to negrify the world to boost your deflated self-esteem. It's evident in your flagrant distortion of the facts: In reality "Tropical East Africa" = Northeast Africa; "African males" = Caucasoids who bear no relation to your sub-Saharan black ass; and "historic times" = pre-historic times -- i.e. from NE Africa to the Levant in the Upper Paleolithic (~26,000 YBP) and from the Levant to Europe and North Africa in the Neolithic (~10,000 YBP).

quote:

---

...of heterogenity in Southern Europe.

---

The more you ignore those seven genetic maps, the more your own quote applies to you (just replace "xenophobes" with "Afrocentrics"):

"Self deluding xenophobes hear only what they want to hear and ignore the facts even when plainly stated."

posted 23 January 2005 09:04 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
The more you ignore those seven genetic maps, the more your own quote applies to you (just replace "xenophobes" with "Afrocentrics"):

[b]"Self deluding xenophobes hear only what they want to hear and ignore the facts even when plainly stated."

Yup, that's rasshole in a nutshell.[/B]

---

Northeast Africans and Tropical East Africans don't equal Caucasoids you moron,stay out of Africa and stick to Europe moron.

And you still haven't replied to my posts about the PN2 clade and Elongated east African anthropometric means. The evidence is against you.

posted 23 January 2005 09:59 AM            

quote:

---

No, you're trying to negrify the world to boost your deflated self-esteem.

---

LOL. You really do need to relax.

You are jumping from Southern Europe into Africa, which is simply rediculous. You need to understand if a gene is found in Africa, and Europe, it HAS to have originated in Africa. Simply, because Africa is the home for all of humanity. This is why you require proof that Ethiopians are Caucasoids. In reality, they are not, as you continue your posting, you are demonstrating that you do have a low self-esteem.

quote:

---

It's evident in your flagrant distortion of the facts: In reality "Tropical East Africa" = Northeast Africa; "African males" = Caucasoids who bear no relation to your sub-Saharan black ass;

---

HCaucasoids come from Caucasus, East Africans orginate from Africa. There is no way in hell an East African is a Caucasoid, except for in your twisted mind.

posted 23 January 2005 11:10 AM            

To understand why Euro-eccentrics need to assert that Black East Africans are 'caucasian' we need to go back to the origin of the caucasian race classification system by Johann Blumenbach.

Blumenbach's central idea was that whites, originating in the caucasus regions of Eurasia were the first and most highly evolved race, other 'races' from Jews, on 'down' to Blacks, were degenerate from the pure white race.

As anthropological findings began to demonstrate the 'opposite', that in fact Black Africans were the original peoples, this idea was exploded.

So several different bad ideas were postulated in order to continue to assert the racial superiority of whites.

One claim was that whites were the progeny of a unique and separate lineage from early African hominids.

Another claim was that Africans constitute 'proto' caucasians - primative froms of whites.

Imagine Blumenbach's ideas as a line sloping down and rightward \.

Reading left to right Caucasian would be at the top and first. Negro would be at the bottom and last. [deginerate]

This idea now being very obviously ridiculous [even on white supremacist websites]...
simply make a mirror inverted image of the line -> /.

Now it slopes from the lower left to the upper right.

'Negro' is 1st, yes... but still least [proto]; 'caucasian' is last but greatest.

Now you are consistant with at least the most basic of anthropological realities regarding human origins.

However, both bad ideas depend ultimately on racial narcisism and grandstanding.

Whites are no different than any other non-African people. They migrated out of Africa 50-100 kya and adapted to their respective enviroment. Most of the physical features, except for the de-melanated skin tones can be found amongst Africans for the same reason that most of the features of most people on Earth can be found in Africa.

Europeans are not different or special in any way. They do not define a source point origin of a 'race-group', but rather one of many small African derived outlets.

This is deflating to the ethno-egocentricism of some Europeans who will invent and convince themselves of the most far-fetched nonsenses rather than face the facts of modern bioanthropology.

Genetics reveals most Africans ranging from Somali to Zulu and including Ancient 'Egyptians and Nubians'to be of common descent via haplogroup 'E3'. E3 haplotype is not native to Europe, and Europeans, including the majority of Nordic types most geographically and genetically distant, and somatically different from Africans are E3 negligable.

This is because E3 first entered Europe as genetic admixture from somatically tropically adapted [Black] Africans at a critical juncture in history associated with the dawn of civilisation:

There are at least seven or eight ­ maybe eleven to thirteen ­ world regions which independently invented agriculture. None in Europe, by the way. - Chistopher Ehret.

So now you see why Eurocentrists need to make honorary pseudo-scientific whites out of Black East Africans.

Caucasianism is desperate dogma flying in the face of the facts; an old exploded idea, patched up from rubble, cobbled together piecemeal and given a new name.

posted 23 January 2005 12:03 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

[i]There are at least seven or eight ­ maybe eleven to thirteen ­ world regions which independently invented agriculture. None in Europe, by the way. - Chistopher Ehret.

---

posted 24 January 2005 07:46 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
stay out of Africa and stick to Europe moron

---

This coming from a guy who started a thread called "Negroid affinities in ancient Greece". Hypocrite.

posted 24 January 2005 07:49 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
EuroDisney, i'm sorry, but your maps, do not prove your far-fetched fantasies of white race purity.

---

posted 24 January 2005 08:05 AM            

quote:

---

They prove that Europeans are all related to one another and clearly distinct from non-Europeans. That's good enough for me.

---

posted 24 January 2005 09:02 AM            

quote:

---

Btw, I'm still waiting on that quote that says Type B is Negroid. I won't hold my breath, though.

---

posted 24 January 2005 09:27 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
This coming from a guy who started a thread called "Negroid affinities in ancient Greece". Hypocrite.

Btw, I'm still waiting on that quote that says Type B is Negroid. I won't hold my breath, though.

---

Type B crania were similar to crania from Gabon(the Fang people), Siwa Oasis people, and Lower Nubian crania, none of whom are Caucasoid. So what more proof do I need? People from Gabon are Bantus moron, so what does that say about Type B people?

posted 24 January 2005 10:21 AM            

quote:

---

(1) Where did the non black population come from,

---

quote:

---

what were the % breakdowns of both groups.

---

quote:

---

i don't think most people would have a problem accepting the evidence of some Nubian population in upper Egypt,

---

quote:

---

the problem is and always has been that with some exceptions AE's simply do not look even remotely close to being black Africans.

---

posted 24 January 2005 11:03 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Horemheb:
even if you take Ausar's argument that upper Egypt was black and lower Egypt was not you would still have to answer two important questions. (1) Where did the non black population come from, if you are assuming the upper Egyptian black population came from the eastern desert and (2) what were the % breakdowns of both groups.
i don't think most people would have a problem accepting the evidence of some Nubian population in upper Egypt, the problem is and always has been that with some exceptions AE's simply do not look even remotely close to being black Africans.

---

I'm about tired of you insulting our intelligence.

[Chief Dentist, and head scribe Hesii-Ra]

There is sooooo much evidence against you, it's not even funny anymore.

posted 25 January 2005 06:50 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
Every time you try to claim East Africans, Moors, Berbers and other Africans for your white race catagory, you expose your lack of genuine belief in your own far fetched assertions.

---

It's funny how everything you say about me actually applies to you and your Afronut cronies:

"Every time you try to claim East Africans, Moors, Berbers and other Africans for your black race catagory, you expose your lack of genuine belief in your own far fetched assertions."

posted 25 January 2005 07:00 AM            

• "We find that Type B is also remarkably close to Angel's ('44) Ancient Greek 'Classic Mediterranean' Type B"

  [Briggs, Stone Age Races of Northwest Africa]
  

Now let's take a closer look at Angel's Type B:

• "Classic Mediterraneans (Type B: Mytilenean, W. Cretan, and Corinthian of Argive parentage in Plate XL, r, s, and t) are light-boned, almost fragile. They have small, barely dolichocrane heads, pentagonoid in outline in both vertical and occipital views, contracted neck muscle area, and low almost vertical rounded foreheads. Their slender, fine-featured faces have square orbits, thin noses smooth and low in the nasion region, and a triangular taper down to pinched jaws with shallow and pointed chin, weak prognathism, and an overbite linked with subnormal degree of teeth wear. They were probably just below medium stature, gracile, slender-necked, brunet, with black or dark hair. They are virtually identical with ancient Libyans and modern Sicilians, and similar to Upper Egyptians of prehistoric and Early Dynastic dates, and to modern Spanish. Type B is the most homogeneous one, with only slight tendencies in longer-headed, linear-faced and smaller, more squat-faced directions."

  
  
  

  [J. Lawrence Angel. Skeletal Material from Attica, Hesperia, 1945]
  

posted 25 January 2005 07:10 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
"Every time you try to claim East Africans, Moors, Berbers and other Africans for your black race catagory....,"

---

The obvious conclusion is that your views are so devoid of integrity, and consequently so indefensible that you resort to spitting the ultimate nasty accusation, namely that other people are as foolish as you are and effectively making the same stupid argument as you, only in reverse.

Of course, we are not. We are simply rejecting your laughably illogical rhetoric outright and in its entireity.

Soooo....make up another Mickey Mouse argument, and try back tomorrow EuroDisney.

posted 26 January 2005 08:20 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
All you do is rant about "indefensible views", "obsession", "rhetoric", "stupid arguments". You never deal directly with the evidence or win the debate. In case you haven't noticed, my "Mickey Mouse arguments" have been kicking your ass.

---