posted 30 January 2005 08:08 AM            

• Somali Y-chromosomes:

  "In general, populations cluster by geographic origin. The most distinct separation is between African and non-African populations. The northeastern-African -- that is, the Ethiopian and Somali -- populations are located centrally between sub-Saharan African and non-African populations."

  [Tishkoff et al. (2000) Short Tandem-Repeat Polymorphism/Alu Haplotype Variation at the PLAT Locus: Implications for Modern Human Origins. Am J Hum Genet; 67:901-925]

  
  

• Somali mtDNA:

  "Somali, as a representative East African population, seem to have experienced a detectable amount of Caucasoid maternal influence"

  [Comas et al. (1999) Analysis of mtDNA HVRII in Several Human Populations Using an Immobilised SSO Probe Hybridisation Assay. Eur J Hum Genet; 7:459-68]

  
  

• Somali Crania:

  As expected given the above, Somalis appear as racially intermediate between Eurasian samples (including Europeans, North Africans and Middle Easterners) and a combined sub-Saharan sample (which contains Western, Central and Southern Africans).

  

  [Brace et al. (1993) Clines and Clusters Versus "Race": A Test in Ancient Egypt and the Case of a Death on the Nile. Yearbook of Physical Anthropology; 36:1-31]

  
  

• Somali Racial Type:

  "FIG. 1 (2 views). A Somali from the tribe of Mahmud Grade, British Somaliland. This Somali represents the closest approximation to a white man found among his people. The extreme narrowness of his head and face, the straight nasal profile, and the prominence of his chin, mark him as less negroid than many of his fellows. At the same time his skin is nearly black, his hair curly but not frizzy. The type to which this Somali belongs is ancient in East Africa, as shown by the excavations of Leakey in Kenya. It is a specialized, locally differentiated Mediterranean racial form."

  

  [Carleton S. Coon. The Races of Europe. MacMillan, 1939]

  
  

• Conclusion:

  Coon and Howells were right. Hiernaux was wrong.
  

posted 30 January 2005 08:58 AM            

"This Somali represents the closest approximation to a white man found among his people."

^^^ utter nonsense

posted 30 January 2005 09:28 AM            

The Samaale again moved farther north in search of water and pasturelands. They swept into the vast Ogaden (Ogaadeen) plains, reaching the southern shore of the Red Sea by the first century A.D. German scholar Bernd Heine, who wrote in the 1970s on early Somali history, observed that the Samaale had occupied the entire Horn of Africa by approximately 100 A.D.http://countrystudies.us/somalia/3.htm

* Hence arab/somali admixture in historical times is of no relevance to the origins of the Somali, and does not lend support to protocaucosoid polygenic fallacy.

posted 30 January 2005 09:34 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
Like most East Africans, Somalis are a hybrid Negroid/Caucasoid population (or, if you prefer, African/non-African). This has been established using several lines of evidence.

• [b]Somali Y-chromosomes:

  "."

  [Tishkoff et al. (2000) Short Tandem-Repeat Polymorphism/Alu Haplotype Variation at the PLAT Locus: Implications for Modern Human Origins. Am J Hum Genet; 67:901-925]

  
  

• Somali mtDNA:

  "Somali, as a representative East African population, seem to have experienced a detectable amount of Caucasoid maternal influence"

  [Comas et al. (1999) Analysis of mtDNA HVRII in Several Human Populations Using an Immobilised SSO Probe Hybridisation Assay. Eur J Hum Genet; 7:459-68]

  
  

• Somali Crania:

  As expected given the above, Somalis appear as racially intermediate between Eurasian samples (including Europeans, North Africans and Middle Easterners) and a combined sub-Saharan sample (which contains Western, Central and Southern Africans).

  

  [Brace et al. (1993) Clines and Clusters Versus "Race": A Test in Ancient Egypt and the Case of a Death on the Nile. Yearbook of Physical Anthropology; 36:1-31]

  
  

• Somali Racial Type:

  "FIG. 1 (2 views). A Somali from the tribe of Mahmud Grade, British Somaliland. This Somali represents the closest approximation to a white man found among his people. The extreme narrowness of his head and face, the straight nasal profile, and the prominence of his chin, mark him as less negroid than many of his fellows. At the same time his skin is nearly black, his hair curly but not frizzy. The type to which this Somali belongs is ancient in East Africa, as shown by the excavations of Leakey in Kenya. It is a specialized, locally differentiated Mediterranean racial form."

  

  [Carleton S. Coon. The Races of Europe. MacMillan, 1939]

  
  

• Conclusion:

  Coon and Howells were right. Hiernaux was wrong.
  

[/B]

---

Lets review the evidence again with distortion:

quote:

---

In general, populations cluster by geographic origin. The most distinct separation is between African and non-African populations. The northeastern-African -- that is, the Ethiopian and Somali -- populations are located centrally between sub-Saharan African and non-African populations

---

As I've pointed out so many damn times and you still don't get it, the location of northeast Africans as intermediate between sub-Saharans and non-Africans is referring to OUT OF AFRICA you moron! Northeast Africans branched of from sub-Saharans and ALL non-Africans branched off from Northeast Africans. That study you cited says this but you did NOT post it, why? Stop distorting facts Evil Euro....

These studies suggest a recent and primary subdivision between African and non-African populations, high levels of divergence among African populations, and a recent shared common ancestry of non-African populations, from a population originating in Africa. The intermediate position, between African and non-African populations, that the Ethiopian Jews and Somalis occupy in the PCA plot also has been observed in other genetic studies (Ritte et al. 1993; Passarino et al. 1998) and could be due either to shared common ancestry or to recent gene flow. The fact that the Ethiopians and Somalis have a subset of the sub-Saharan African haplotype diversity and that the non-African populations have a subset of the diversity present in Ethiopians and Somalis makes simple-admixture models less likely; rather, these observations support the hypothesis proposed by other nuclear-genetic studies (Tishkoff et al. 1996a, 1998a, 1998b; Kidd et al. 1998)that populations in northeastern Africa may have diverged from those in the rest of sub-Saharan Africa early in the history of modern African populations and that a subset of this northeastern-African population migrated out of Africa and populated the rest of the globe. These conclusions are supported by recent mtDNA analysis (Quintana-Murci et al. 1999).

From the same study moron.

quote:

---

"Somali, as a representative East African population, seem to have experienced a detectable amount of Caucasoid maternal influence"

---

My God, southern Europeans and Middle easterners have a detectable amount of African ancestry, therefore they are Negroid-Caucasoid hybrids, now we're even. Funny that the study you quoted from NEVER said Somalis are hybrids.

quote:

---

As expected given the above, Somalis appear as racially intermediate between Eurasian samples (including Europeans, North Africans and Middle Easterners) and a combined sub-Saharan sample (which contains Western, Central and Southern Africans

---

Somalis are Elongated East Africans, period, just as the Tutsi, Oromo, and Masai does. According measurements comparing them to OTHER Elongated East Africans...

Tutsi of Rwanda:

[color=green]

• Stature: 176 cm
  
• Head length: 198 mm
  
• Head breadth: 147 mm
  
• Face height: 125 mm
  
• Face breadth: 134 mm
  
• Nose height: 56 mm
  
• Nose breadth: 39 mm
  
• Relative trunk length: 49.7
  
• Cephalic Index: 74.5
  
• Facial Index: 92.8
  
• Nasal Index: 69.5[/color]

  
  Masai:

  [color=blue]

• Stature: 173 cm
  
• Head length: 194 mm
  
• Head Breadth: 140 mm
  
• Face Height: 121 mm
  
• Face Breadth: 137 mm
  
• Nose Height: 54 mm
  
• Nose Breadth: 39 mm
  
• Relative Trunk length: 47.7
  
• Cephalic Index: 72.8
  
• Facial Index: 89.0
  
• Nasal Index: 72.0[/color]

  
  Galla(Oromo):

  [color=red]

• Stature: 171 cm
  
• Head length: 190 mm
  
• Head Breadth: 147 mm
  
• Face Height: 122 mm
  
• Face Breadth: 133 mm
  
• Nose Height: 53 mm
  
• Nose Breadth: 37 mm
  
• Relative Trunk length: 50.3
  
• Cephalic Index: 77.6
  
• Facial Index: 91.5
  
• Nasal Index: 69.0[/color]

  Sab Somali:

  [color=gray]

• Stature: 173 cm
  
• Head length: 194 mm
  
• Head Breadth: 145 mm
  
• Face Height: 119 mm
  
• Face Breadth: 134 mm
  
• Nose Height: 49 mm
  
• Nose Breadth: 36 mm
  
• Relative Trunk length: 49.7
  
• Cephalic Index: 74.7
  
• Facial Index: 88.5
  
• Nasal Index: 72.8[/color]

  Warsingali Somali:

  [color=navy]

• Stature: 168 cm
  
• Head length: 192 mm
  
• Head Breadth: 143 mm
  
• Face Height: 123 mm
  
• Face Breadth: 131 mm
  
• Nose Height: 52 mm
  
• Nose Breadth: 34 mm
  
• Relative Trunk length: 50.7
  
• Cephalic Index: 74.5
  
• Facial Index: 94.1
  
• Nasal Index: 66.0[/color]
  

Source:

Jean Hiernaux

The People of Africa

pg 142

So screw Coon and Brace and you're making two different statements, first you're saying Somalis are hybrids, now you're quoting Coon as saying the mediterraneans? WTF? Evil Euro is wring, the facts I posted are right.

posted 30 January 2005 09:37 AM            

quote:

---

The polygenic aspects of Coon's theory were racist and widely recognized to be wrong (Dobzhansky 1963, 1968; Hulse 1963; Montagu 1963; Oschinsky 1963; Washburn 1963 [based on the presidential address at the AAA]).

---

How could a new species evolve in lockstep parallelism from three ancestral populations spread over more than half the globe? Three groups, each moving in the same direction, and all still able to interbreed and constitute a single species after more than a million years of change? (I know that multiregionalists posit limited gene flow to Circumvent this problem, but can such a claim represent more than necessary special pleading in the face of a disabling theoretical difficulty? - Stephen Jay Gould.

Proto-caucasianism is polygenic fallacy applied to the concept of race

How could a new race [caucasians] evolve in lockstep parallelism from distinct ancestral populations [clades] spread

over more than half the globe?

Distinct [clades], each moving in the same direction, and all still able to constitute a single race?

I know that proto-caucasianists posit limited gene flow [which they completely fail to document] to circumvent this

problem, but can such a claim represent more than necessary special pleading in the face of a disabling

theoretical difficulty? - Namely the PN2-clade, the shared ancestral heritage of much of modern AFrica [including Egypt], and distinct from Ice Age Europe, with it's thin-boned rickets-proned, demelanated, native Europeans?

next....

posted 30 January 2005 11:08 AM            

In terms of mtDNA the ONLY substantial non-African lineage Somalians have is pre-HV at about 11%. EvilEurope would have us believe that M1 is Eurasian in origin and then try and inflate the Eurasian input in East Africa. There is still great debate on the origins of M1 , but the preponderance of the evidence leans to an East African origin.

In terms of the Y Chromosome, the Eurasian input is about the same, with the presence of haplogroup J at about 11% as well. This limited gene flow, which probably dates to the historic Arab period in no way implies that the original Somalians were Caucasoid. In fact Bantu speakers from Cameroon have R1b frequencies greater than 14%, does that mean the Bantu speakers from Cameroon are "Caucasoid"? In addition, given the fact that these Cameroonian's have MORE Eurasian genetic inputs than the Somali it is obvious that we cannot explain the narrow noses and faces in Somali by attributing it to gene flow from Eurasia during the pre-historic epoch.

posted 30 January 2005 01:25 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:

In terms of mtDNA the ONLY substantial non-African lineage Somalians have is pre-HV at about 11%. EvilEurope would have us believe that M1 is Eurasian in origin and then try and inflate the Eurasian input in East Africa. There is still great debate on the origins of M1 , but the preponderance of the evidence leans to an East African origin.

In terms of the Y Chromosome, the Eurasian input is about the same, with the presence of haplogroup J at about 11% as well. This limited gene flow, which probably dates to the historic Arab period in no way implies that the original Somalians were Caucasoid. In fact Bantu speakers from Cameroon have R1b frequencies greater than 14%, does that mean the Bantu speakers from Cameroon are "Caucasoid"? In addition, given the fact that these Cameroonian's have MORE Eurasian genetic inputs than the Somali it is obvious that we cannot explain the narrow noses and faces in Somali by attributing it to gene flow from Eurasia during the pre-historic epoch.

In comparison African derived haplogroup E was found at a frequency of 24% in Greece.

---

Indeed, I think Evil Euros premises on East Africans is that they look the way they do, because of Eurasian admixture. This of course, is simply wishful thinking. I posted a thread on "Elongated African Types", showing not only richness of E3b haplotype in East Africa, as opposed to outside the continent, as well as fossil discoveries at Gamble's Cave in the Kenya Rift Valley and at Olduvai in northern Tanzania. Forget about linguistic data.

BTW, is Evil Euro in the dark about these Coon materials being trashed by the scientific community a long time ago?

posted 30 January 2005 01:42 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super car:
Indeed, I think Evil Euros premises on East Africans is that they look the way they do, because of Eurasian admixture. This of course, is simply wishful thinking. I posted a thread on "Elongated African Types", showing not only richness of E3b haplotype in East Africa, as opposed to outside the continent, as well as fossil discoveries at Gamble's Cave in the Kenya Rift Valley and at Olduvai in northern Tanzania. Forget about linguistic data.

BTW, is Evil Euro in the dark about these Coon materials being trashed by the scientific community a long time ago?

[This message has been edited by Super car (edited 30 January 2005).]

---

posted 30 January 2005 02:20 PM            

Oxymoron not withstanding, EuroDisney intentionally ignores the subtler implications inherent in Out of Africa.

East Africa is essentially the center of a genetic hub and as such can be conceived as historically intermediate between any two points on the edge of a circle. The center of the circle is always intermediate.

Meanwhile, because the genetic history of humanity is largely and African history:
there is more genetic diversity in Africa than in the whole world outside Africa." - Dr Spencer Wells

East Africa therefore cannot be conceived of in terms of European phenotype and genotype, which are often irrelevant to the physical and genetic history of its peoples.

As for E3b, the point is not simply that it orignates in Africa but that is directly related to E3a (it's African brother) and descendant from E3(it's African father).

This documents the fact of BOTH the common ancestry of elongated and broad African physiogamy, and the their cladic DISTINCTION from the proto-whites of Ice Age Europe. [not of PN2 clade and therefore not-descendant from Somali, Zulu or any other PN2 Africans, period...case closed.]

Hence, Keita observes the PN2 clade: 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.....

Proto-caucasian polygenesis postulates a 'race' that spontaneously generates across genetic and geography boundaries. [wherever long faces are found. ] That's not science. It's wishful thinking.

posted 30 January 2005 02:30 PM            

quote:

---

Thought Writes:

There is still great debate on the origins of M1 , but the preponderance of the evidence leans to an East African origin.

---

What is the best argument about a non-East African origin of M1?

quote:

---

rasol:

East Africa is essentially the center of a genetic hub and as such can be conceived as historically intermediate between any two points on the edge of a circle. The center of the circle is always intermediate.

Meanwhile, because the genetic history of humanity is largely and African history:
there is more genetic diversity in Africa than in the whole world outside Africa." - Dr Spencer Wells

East Africa therefore cannot be conceived of in terms of European phenotype and genotype, which are often irrelevant to the physical and genetic history of it's peoples.

As for E3b, the point is not simply that it orignates in Africa but that is directly related to E3a (it's brother) and descendant from E3(it's father). This documents the fact of BOTH the common ancestry of elongated and broad African physiogamy, and the their cladic DISTINCTION from the proto-whites of Ice Age Europe.

Hence, Keita observes the PN2 clade: 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.....

---

Indeed.

posted 30 January 2005 02:43 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super car:
What is the best argument about a non-East African origin of M1?

---

Thought Posts:
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2156/5/26

"Based on the high frequency and diversity of haplogroup M in India and elsewhere in Asia, some authors have suggested (versus [3]) that M may have arisen in Southwest Asia [16,17,31]. Finding M1 or a lineage ancestral to M1 in India, could help to explain the presence of M1 in Africa as a result of a back migration from India. Yet, to date this has not been achieved [15], this study). Therefore, one cannot rule out the still most parsimonious scenario that haplogroup M arose in East Africa [3]. Furthermore, the lack of L3 lineages other than M and N (indeed, L3M and L3N) in India is more consistent with the African launch of haplogroup M. On the other hand, one also observes that: i) M1 is the only variant of haplogroup M found in Africa; ii) M1 has a fairly restricted phylogeography in Africa, barely penetrating into sub-Saharan populations, being found predominantly in association with the Afro-Asiatic linguistic phylum – a finding that appears to be inconsistent with the distribution of sub-clades of haplogroups L3 and L2 that have similar time depths. That, plus the presence of M1 without accompanying L lineages in the Caucasus [32] and [our unpublished data], leaves the question about the origin of haplogroup M still open."

posted 30 January 2005 02:47 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super car:
Phenotype: Couldn't resist the temptation, but this photo defeats its purpose. This man has a shaven head, but at the same time, he cannot be mistaken for a Eurasian.

[This message has been edited by Super car (edited 30 January 2005).]

---

Thought Writes:

He kind of looks like Kevin Garnett and many Wolof to me.

posted 31 January 2005 07:35 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
As I've pointed out so many damn times and you still don't get it, the location of northeast Africans as intermediate between sub-Saharans and non-Africans is referring to OUT OF AFRICA you moron! Northeast Africans branched of from sub-Saharans and ALL non-Africans branched off from Northeast Africans. That study you cited says this but you did NOT post it, why? Stop distorting facts Evil Euro....

These studies suggest a recent and primary subdivision between African and non-African populations, high levels of divergence among African populations, and a recent shared common ancestry of non-African populations, from a population originating in Africa. The intermediate position, between African and non-African populations, that the Ethiopian Jews and Somalis occupy in the PCA plot also has been observed in other genetic studies (Ritte et al. 1993; Passarino et al. 1998) and could be due either to shared common ancestry or to recent gene flow. The fact that the Ethiopians and Somalis have a subset of the sub-Saharan African haplotype diversity and that the non-African populations have a subset of the diversity present in Ethiopians and Somalis makes simple-admixture models less likely; rather, these observations support the hypothesis proposed by other nuclear-genetic studies (Tishkoff et al. 1996a, 1998a, 1998b; Kidd et al. 1998)that populations in northeastern Africa may have diverged from those in the rest of sub-Saharan Africa early in the history of modern African populations and that a subset of this northeastern-African population migrated out of Africa and populated the rest of the globe. These conclusions are supported by recent mtDNA analysis (Quintana-Murci et al. 1999).

From the same study moron.

---

You're so deluded that you fail to see how that passage proves me right. It shows that Out-of-Africa migrants (i.e. pre-historic East Africans) were essentially non-African, just as Howells determined. This explains why modern Bantu-influenced Somalis are "intermediate between sub-Saharans and non-Africans". Thanks for the help.

quote:

---

My God, southern Europeans and Middle easterners have a detectable amount of African ancestry, therefore they are Negroid-Caucasoid hybrids, now we're even. Funny that the study you quoted from NEVER said Somalis are hybrids.

---

The figure given in the study is, I believe, 22%. On the Y-chromosome, judging by the language in the quote, we can assume that it's close to 50%. That's a whole lot of non-African DNA.

quote:

---

So screw Coon and Brace

---

Yeah, screw experts and evidence and facts and truth. They just get in the way.

quote:

---

you're making two different statements, first you're saying Somalis are hybrids, now you're quoting Coon as saying the mediterraneans?

---

Learn how to read. Coon doesn't say they're Mediterranean. He says that the pictured individual is the "closest approximation" to a Caucasoid found among Somalis and "less negroid" than most (but still partially Negroid, obviously).

quote:

---

The sad part about this is that he thinks Somalis and Ethiopians have west and central African elements in them, they do not.

---

Of course they do:

posted 31 January 2005 08:32 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
Of course they do:

[b]http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2004/09/african-mtdna-landscape.html[/B]

---

The figure says 11%, M1 is not Caucasoid or west Eurasian. As for the elements of West and central Africans versus Somalis, look at the fucking map, its a big difference between the two. The language of that does NOT indicate 50% non-African mixture and non-Africans possess a SUBSET of Northeast Africans genetic diversity, it says nothing about Caucasoids or any race skeletally. The earliest West Asians looked like Africans not non-Africans read dummy....

Am J Phys Anthropol. 1996 Mar;99(3):389-412.

Comparison of craniofacial features of major human groups.

Hanihara T.

Department of Anatomy, Tohoku University School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan.

Distance analysis and factor analysis, based on Q-mode correlation coefficients, were applied to 23 craniofacial measurements in 1,802 recent and prehistoric crania from major geographical areas of the Old World. The major findings are as follows: 1) Australians show closer similarities to African populations than to Melanesians. 2) Recent Europeans align with East Asians, and early West Asians resemble Africans. 3) The Asian population complex with regional difference between northern and southern members is manifest. 4) Clinal variations of craniofacial features can be detected in the Afro-European region on the one hand, and Australasian and East Asian region on the other hand. 5) The craniofacial variations of major geographical groups are not necessarily consistent with their geographical distribution pattern. This may be a sign that the evolutionary divergence in craniofacial shape among recent populations of different geographical areas is of a highly limited degree. Taking all of these into account, a single origin for anatomically modern humans is the most parsimonious interpretation of the craniofacial variations presented in this study.

posted 31 January 2005 08:39 AM            

It is an elementary mistake of biology to define a general ancestor by a specific descendant. An ancestral-group may have many descendants, not just one. Europeans are not the only non-African descendants of East Africans.....all non Africans are, including Melanesians: http://orders.anglican.org/mbh/pics.htm

East Africans are genetically intermediate between Melanesians and West Africans.

In spite of similar physical appearance, according to Sforza-Cavalli Evolutionary Relationships of Human Populations on a Global Scale, Melanesians and West Africans...are two of the most genetically distant groups on the planet.

Does this tell us that East Africans may be classified as proto-Melanesian?

Does this demonstrate that East Africans are a hybrid between two racial groups, Melanesian and West African?

Does this demonstrate the concept of racial groups in any way? ?

No. It merely demonstrates that all peoples ultimately originate in East Africa, and so contain essentially a sub-set of African diversity.

Phenotype is shaped largely by environment, and South Sea Islanders are adapted physically to warm humid climates not unlike West Africa.

This fact futher illustrates the failure of Howell's methodology re: skull measurement, which lead to systemic misclassification of homogeneous African groups into "Melanesian" among various other 'types.'

classifying populations, whether by geography or by "race", is not morphologically or biologically accurate because of the wide variation even in homogeneous populations - J. Edwards, A. Leathers, et al.

Want to find your proto-Melanesians....look to the early south Sea Island populations, polynesian and melanesian, from Fiji to Hawaii share a common ancestry via Y chromosome haploytype- much like PN2 clade Africans who also share a common ancestry.

For proto-Europeans one should look to the early ICE-age moderns who were the first to morphologically adapt to the cold climates of Europe.

The pre historic East African....are proto-East African.

posted 31 January 2005 08:56 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:

He kind of looks like Kevin Garnett and many Wolof to me.

---

posted 31 January 2005 08:59 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by theborg:
I hope this board is not going to sink to the level of some of it's more "base" users, by allowing the use of racist terms...

---

posted 01 February 2005 08:44 AM            

quote:

---

S Mohammad writes:

The figure says 11%, M1 is not Caucasoid or west Eurasian. As for the elements of West and central Africans versus Somalis, look at the fucking map, its a big difference between the two. The language of that does NOT indicate 50% non-African mixture and non-Africans possess a SUBSET of Northeast Africans genetic diversity, it says nothing about Caucasoids or any race skeletally. The earliest West Asians looked like Africans not non-Africans read dummy....

Am J Phys Anthropol. 1996 Mar;99(3):389-412.

Comparison of craniofacial features of major human groups.

Hanihara T.

Department of Anatomy, Tohoku University School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan.

[i]Distance analysis and factor analysis, based on Q-mode correlation coefficients, were applied to 23 craniofacial measurements in 1,802 recent and prehistoric crania from major geographical areas of the Old World. The major findings are as follows: 1) Australians show closer similarities to African populations than to Melanesians. 2) Recent Europeans align with East Asians, and early West Asians resemble Africans. 3) The Asian population complex with regional difference between northern and southern members is manifest. 4) Clinal variations of craniofacial features can be detected in the Afro-European region on the one hand, and Australasian and East Asian region on the other hand. 5) The craniofacial variations of major geographical groups are not necessarily consistent with their geographical distribution pattern. This may be a sign that the evolutionary divergence in craniofacial shape among recent populations of different geographical areas is of a highly limited degree. Taking all of these into account, a single origin for anatomically modern humans is the most parsimonious interpretation of the craniofacial variations presented in this study.

---

posted 01 February 2005 10:06 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
Like most East Africans, Somalis are a hybrid Negroid/Caucasoid population

---

Thought Writes:

Evil Euro, before we can take this debate to its logical conclusion we need you to define your terms. Please tell us specifically what a "Caucasoid" and "Negroid" are in a scientific sense?