posted 14 March 2005 08:15 AM            

(Source)

Note that the last Ice Age peaked 18,000-20,000 years ago, and that the current warming trend didn't begin until the Holocene -- long after the last OOA migrations, at about the time Negroids developed and spread in Africa.

That's one more nail in the Afronuts' coffin.

posted 14 March 2005 09:55 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
A central tenet of Afronut ideology is that humans originated in "Tropical Black Africa", which is meant to imply similarity to modern Negroids who are adapted to a hot, humid climate. But that's just another delusional fantasy. "Mild and arid" would better describe climatic conditions in Pleistocene East Africa:

(Source)

Note that the last Ice Age peaked 18,000-20,000 years ago, and that the current warming trend didn't begin until the Holocene -- long after the last OOA migrations, at about the time Negroids developed and spread in Africa.

That's one more nail in the Afronuts' coffin.

---

None of what you have posted made any references to Africa so I don't see what point you're trying to make. You're running circles all around yourself trying to prove something that can't be proven. African wasn't covered in ice.

posted 14 March 2005 10:38 AM            

Must be....
Dark skin evolved pari passu with the loss of body hair and was the original state for the genus Homo. - Nina G. Jablonski

and....
Early claims that Caucasoid peoples once lived in eastern Africa have been shown to be wrong. - J.O. Vogel

why so? because....
Nature has selected for people with darker skin in tropical latitudes, especially in nonforested regions, where ultraviolet radiation from the sun is usually the most intense. Melanin acts as a protective biological shield against ultraviolet radiation. - http://anthro.palomar.edu

As clearly shown by....
Relationship between skin color, UV and Latitude:

Can baby Disney comprehend that

- the primary selective force is determined by 'UV';

- UV is determined primarily by 'LATITUDE';

- temperature & humidity fluxuations in the tropics is secondary,

- the Horn region of East Africa traverses the equator and has the most intense UV of any region on Earth?

Is this too difficult for baby Disney? Does it make him angry? Sorry , whites are simply not indigenous to East Africa. Cying won't help you, and lying won't either. You might try growing up though, that might help.

posted 14 March 2005 12:41 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by HERU:
Its a shame Evil Euro. Everytime you start a thread, these guys end up making you look dumb as hell.

---

Aint that the truth!!!

posted 14 March 2005 03:14 PM            

Sight Writes:

Evil E doesn't seem to realize that a large portion of the modern West African heritage is traced back to the arid Sahara. Furthermore he must not realize that a large portion of this Saharan heritage is traced back to pleistocene East Africa. As the Sahara receeded populations pushed south into the drying rain forest belt where they merged with indigenous dimunitive Central African populations.

posted 14 March 2005 04:02 PM            

quote:

---

Furthermore he must not realize that a large portion of this Saharan heritage is traced back to pleistocene East Africa.

---

Pleistocene East African: http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence/realeve/face/zoom2.html

The normal or original state for modern humans is probably black because melanin protects against the harmful effects of the sun in the tropics. Melanin genes can mutate in various ways that stop our skin from making effective pigment.

In northern Europe and northern Asia, this is beneficial, because too much melanin in a low-sun environment prevents production of vitamin D. Over thousands of years, people with paler skin survive better in the north and are "naturally selected" to survive. This is the most likely reason Europeans and northern Asians are pale-skinned. - Stephen Oppenheimer, author Peopling of the World

Pale skins evolved in northern climates, and relatively recently (more on this later)....and not in UV intense tropical East Africa, literally the most maladaptive place on Earth for pale skin..... of course.

posted 14 March 2005 06:29 PM            

An element of modern Greeks have a sub-Saharan history suggesting they may have arrived via the Egyptian kingdom or left the sub-Sahara due to the climate

http://www.eliznik.org.uk/RomaniaHistory/genetic_history.htm

posted 14 March 2005 08:52 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Horemheb:
Thought, they also pushed east.

---

Thought Writes:

posted 15 March 2005 08:04 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by 0000:
Can baby Disney comprehend that

- the primary selective force is determined by 'UV';

- UV is determined primarily by 'LATITUDE';

- temperature & humidity fluxuations in the tropics is secondary,

- the Horn region of East Africa traverses the equator and has the most intense UV of any region on Earth?

---

Can the low-IQ slave comprehend that

- his data on UV, latitude and melanin pertains to modern times;

- UV radiation decreases as solar activity decreases;

- significantly lowered levels of solar activity result in Ice Ages;

- hominids developed during such an Ice Age?

And will he and all his little low-IQ slaves ever get over their foolish obsession with skin color?

"Skin coloration in humans is adaptive and labile. Skin pigmentation levels have changed more than once in human evolution. Because of this, skin coloration is of no value in determining phylogenetic relationships among modern human groups." (N. Jablonski and G. Chaplin, J Hum Evol, 2000)

Dark skin alone does not a "Tropical Black African" make. Africa during the Pleistocene did not have a tropical climate similar to today's. It had a much cooler, dryer climate. Hence, pre-historic Africans were not tropically adapted Negroids like those living in sub-Saharan Africa today.

quote:

---

An element of modern Greeks have a sub-Saharan history suggesting they may have arrived via the Egyptian kingdom or left the sub-Sahara due to the climate

---

posted 15 March 2005 08:09 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by HERU:
Its a shame Evil Euro. Everytime you start a thread, these guys end up making you look dumb as hell.

---

No, they make themselves look dumb as hell...every time.

quote:

---

I don't know much about physical anthropology but I do know threads like this are signs of a desperate man.

---

Actually, threads like that deal directly with physical anthropology. So I wouldn't expect you to understand them, as you admit to knowing very little about the subject. But if you want to see true signs of desperation, you need only look at yourself.

Drowning Afronuts . . .

posted 15 March 2005 08:29 AM            

quote:

---

EuroDisney writes: this data on UV, latitude and melanin pertains to modern times;

---

East Africa has always been at a tropical latitude, with tropical UV levels and tropical melanin level.
....what, are you hoping your stupidity is contagious or something?

quote:

---

Originally posted by HERU:
Its a shame Evil Euro. Everytime you start a thread, these guys end up making you look dumb as hell.

---

quote:

---

Djehuti writes:Aint that the truth!!!

---

Caucasoid, anthropology

1) A native inhabitant of the Caucasus.
2) Related languages of natives of the Caucasus mountains.
3) A member of a racial classifcation - no longer in scientific use. The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition,2000

quote:

---

Low-IQ slave descendents with inferiority complexes

---

quote:

---

pigmentation is irrelevant to racial affinity

---

[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 15 March 2005).]

quote:

---

Dark skin evolved pari passu with the loss of body hair and was the original state for the genus Homo. - Nina G. Jablonski

Early claims that Caucasoid peoples once lived in eastern Africa have been shown to be wrong. - J.O. Vogel

Nature has selected for people with darker skin in tropical latitudes, especially in nonforested regions, where ultraviolet radiation from the sun is usually the most intense. Melanin acts as a protective biological shield against ultraviolet radiation. -

---

posted 15 March 2005 12:28 PM            

quote:

---

Rossi writes:aint that the truth!

---

Just to let you know, I'm not Rossi!!

posted 15 March 2005 12:36 PM            

Africa climate history: http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/Forum8/HTML/001735.html

posted 15 March 2005 01:43 PM            

quote:

---

Dark skin alone does not a "Tropical Black African" make. Africa during the Pleistocene did not have a tropical climate similar to today's. It had a much cooler, dryer climate. Hence, pre-historic Africans were not tropically adapted Negroids like those living in sub-Saharan Africa today.

---

As usual you always shoot yourself, why do you make one conclusion without first reviewing the skeletal evidence? If prehistoric Pleistocene Africans were not tropically adapted, explain this:

The modern human morphological homogeneity,the discontinuities in the fossil record outside Africa, the chronological contrast between the first appearance of modern humans in Africa and in the rest of the world, and the tropical body proportions of the earliest modern Europeans in contrast to those of Neanderthals led to a wide acceptance of a view developed gradually and independently since the late 1970s of a single origin, a recent origin, and an African origin (Bra¨uer, 1989; Holliday, 1997; Howells 1976, 1989; Lahr, 1996; Lieberman, 1996; Stringer et al., 1984; Turbo´n et al.,1997; Waddle, 1994).

Towards a Theory of Modern Human Origins: Geography, Demography, and Diversity in Recent Human Evolution.

YEARBOOK OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 41:137–176 (1998)

And we can't forget about this study:

Body proportions covary with climate, apparently as the result of climatic selection. Ontogenic research and migrant studies have demonstrated that body proportions are largely genetically controlled and are under low selective rates; thus studies of body form can provide evidence for evolutionarily short-term dispersals and/or gene flow. Following these observations, competing models of modern human origins yield different predictions concerning body proportion shifts in Late Pleistocene Europe. Replacement predicts that the earliest modern Europeans will possess "tropical" body proportions (assuming Africa is the center of origin), while Regional Continuity permits only minor shifts in body shape, due to climatic change and/or improved cultural buffering. This study tests these predictions via analyses of osteometric data reflective of trunk height and breadth, limb proportions and relative body mass for samples of Early Upper Paleolithic (EUP), Late Upper Paleolithic (LUP) and Mesolithic (MES) humans and 13 recent African and European populations. Results reveal a clear tendency for the EUP sample to cluster with recent Africans, while LUP and MES samples cluster with recent Europeans. These results refute the hypothesis of local continuity in Europe, and are consistent with an interpretation of elevated gene flow (and population dispersal?) from Africa, followed by subsequent climatic adaptation to colder conditions. These data do not, however, preclude the possibility of some (albeit small) contribution of genes from Neandertals to succeeding populations, as is postulated in Brauer's "Afro-European Sapiens" model.

J Hum Evol. 1997 May;32(5):423-48.
Body proportions in Late Pleistocene Europe and modern human origins.
Holliday TW.

Why do you keep jumping up to get knocked right back down? If you still believe Pleistocene prehistoric Africans weren't tropically adapted you're setting yourself up to run into another:

[This message has been edited by Topdog (edited 15 March 2005).]

posted 16 March 2005 08:15 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
East Africa has always been at a tropical latitude, with tropical UV levels and tropical melanin level.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Topdog:
the chronological contrast between the first appearance of modern humans in Africa and in the rest of the world, and the tropical body proportions of the earliest modern Europeans in contrast to those of Neanderthals led to a wide acceptance of a view developed gradually and independently since the late 1970s of a single origin, a recent origin, and an African origin

---

The location of East Africa in the tropics is not in dispute. Neither is the OOA replacement model. Why bring these things up? What we're talking about is climatic change in the tropics from the Pleistocene to the Holocene, and its effect on human evolution. Modern Africans are adapted to the present warm tropical climate. Pre-historic Africans were adapted to a cooler, Ice Age tropical climate with reduced solar activity and less UV radiation. Certainly they were different from Neanderthals, because the climate farther north was even colder. But they were also different from modern sub-Saharan Africans, because the climate in the region now is much hotter.

posted 16 March 2005 08:37 AM            

quote:

---

What we're talking about is climatic change

---

No, what you're talking about is race, and the nonexistence of prehistoric white of east Africa.

quote:

---

Modern Africans are adapted to the present warm tropical climate.

---

Tropical Africans have dark skin due to tropical UV which is primarily a product of tropical latitude, which does not change. Hence Africans have always had dark skin. Your dissembling does not in any way refute that fact.

quote:

---

Pre-historic Africans were adapted to a cooler, Ice Age tropical climate with reduced solar activity and less UV radiation.

---

Incorrect and moot, since Africa has always had tropical UV levels, tropical desert, tropical savanna and tropical forest, and this is DISTINCT from the glacial cycle, to which you are erroneously and simplisticly trying to relate it.

East Africa has actually had greater UV during the peak of some past glacial cycles, and lesser during periods of glacial retreat.

The Southern Hemisphere has had greater UV during certain periods when the North has had less. The tropics have had greater UV when the high latitutudes have had less. Africa itself has been warmer and cooler wetter and dryer than it is today several times over the course of human history, and populations have migrated to the most equatable climes throughout history.

Baby E should stick to attempting to distort anthropology as you know even less (if possible) about meteorology.

You are attempting to introduce a massive red herring to make up for you lack of evidence to support your racist views.

Prehistoric East African whites do not exist.

For those genuinely interested in Africa's climate history: http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/Forum8/HTML/001735.html

posted 17 March 2005 12:31 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
The location of East Africa in the tropics is not in dispute. Neither is the OOA replacement model. Why bring these things up? What we're talking about is climatic change in the tropics from the Pleistocene to the Holocene, and its effect on human evolution. Modern Africans are adapted to the present [b]warm tropical climate. Pre-historic Africans were adapted to a cooler, Ice Age tropical climate with reduced solar activity and less UV radiation. Certainly they were different from Neanderthals, because the climate farther north was even colder. But they were also different from modern sub-Saharan Africans, because the climate in the region now is much hotter.

[This message has been edited by Evil Euro (edited 16 March 2005).][/B]

---

Do you know the Plesitocene period? And you have no proof that they were different from modern sub-Saharans in body proportions , you're simply hashing up a bunch of unproven theories to limit the black race to one area now one time period? The first modern humans who appeared in Europe were tropically adapted which supports OOA, not multiregionlism, for the simple fact that the first humans in Africa, who bTW migrated out of East Africa, were tropically adapted. All you're trying to prove, without any success, that they weren't tropically adapted like Negroids, this has nothing to do with Negroids.

posted 17 March 2005 12:50 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:

The location of East Africa in the tropics is not in dispute.

---

Well, it looks like the overwhelming pressure of facts stacked against him, forced Euro to now admit that East Africa is in the tropics. Earlier he tried to push the Horn of Africa to the North. Since E3b originated in East Africa, the tropical region, we should take this to its logical conclusion: E3b is of tropical African extraction. Of course now, he is using climate as a way out, which Rasol has already appropriately addressed.

posted 17 March 2005 07:49 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Topdog:
All you're trying to prove, without any success, that they weren't tropically adapted like Negroids

---

posted 17 March 2005 08:24 AM            

quote:

---

If you still believe Pleistocene prehistoric Africans weren't tropically adapted you're setting yourself up to run into another:

---

ROTFL!

This thread is a red herring.

East Africans have always been Black and no evidence to the contrary has been offerred because none exists.

I think you are right and lil'E is a lunatic and as such...will drive past the dead end sign and right.....

O V E R T H E E D G E!

posted 17 March 2005 09:48 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

I think ..... lil'E is a lunatic and as such...will drive past the dead end sign and right.....

[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 17 March 2005).]

---

Thought Writes:

posted 18 March 2005 07:55 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought2:
Instead of accepting the OBVIOUS fact that southern Europeans have some recent African heritage

---

posted 18 March 2005 12:00 PM            

Thought Writes:

African derived genes made their way into southern Europe during the HOLOCENE which literally means recent epoch.

{African in this case isn't Black}

Thought Writes:

We'll never know due to the fact that you have NOT defined what YOU mean when you use terms such as Black, Negroid and Caucasoid. My suspecision is that you chose to use vague slogans because most people view modern East Africans such as Maasi, Oromo and Somali with so-called "causcasoid" cranial features as Black.

{But your desperate need to be associated with superior Southern Europeans has been duly noted}

Thought Writes:

posted 19 March 2005 07:45 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought2:
African derived genes made their way into southern Europe during the HOLOCENE which literally means recent epoch.

---

"African derived" is meaningless. All genes are ultimately African derived. But those that made their way into Europe during the Holocene had more immediate origins in the Upper Paleolithic/Mesolithic (i.e. Pleistocene) Middle East. The people carrying them were not remotely African.

quote:

---

We'll never know due to the fact that you have NOT defined what YOU mean when you use terms such as Black, Negroid and Caucasoid. My suspecision is that you chose to use vague slogans because most people view modern East Africans such as Maasi, Oromo and Somali with so-called "causcasoid" cranial features as Black.

---

There's nothing vague about "Negroid" and "Caucasoid". They're anthropological terms. You just don't like them. You prefer the vague "Black African" which enables you to incorporate all sorts of different races into one group. For example, Ethiopians are best described as Caucasoid-Negroid hybrids. Calling them "Black Africans" is your way of avoiding the truth. Similarly, early humans (represented by the Khoisan) were neither Black in skin tone, nor Negroid in race. But you're trying to claim them with your unscientific blanket term.

quote:

---

Superior and inferior are obviously subjective terms, with that said it is clear that the trend in technological diffusion from 10,000 BC to 1 AD was clearly FROM Africa TO southern Europe.

---

You're a funny man. No culture in Southern Europe has come from Africa, let alone sub-Saharan Africa. That's why Afronuts and Aryanists alike are trying to steal Southern European cultures, and not the other way around. But keep dreaming, though.

Superior:

Inferior:

posted 19 March 2005 10:13 AM            

Thought Writes:

There are NO haplogroup E lineages that have their origins in the Middle East. All E3b1 lineages found in Europe originate in Africa except E3b1 alpha, which had its origin in the Balkans. E3b1 alpha has a MRCA of 7.8 ky. Agriculture in Europe predates 7.8 ky and was diffused from the Middle East, this means that Agriculture and Animal husbandry were BROUGHT to the Balkins (Europe) by populations carrying East African lineages. I repeat no haplogroup E lineages have been discovered to arise in the Middle East.

{There's nothing vague about "Negroid" and "Caucasoid". They're anthropological terms.}

Thought Writes:

It has already been proven that these terms are no longer in use because they are scientifically invalid.

{ You prefer the vague "Black African" which enables you to incorporate all sorts of different races into one group. For example, Ethiopians are best described as Caucasoid-Negroid hybrids.}

Thought Writes:

You still have not defined the terms “Negroid” and “Caucasoid”, furthermore you have failed to explain why you believe southern Europeans who have phenotypic affinities with Nigerians and Swedes should be lumped with Swedes?

{Similarly, early humans (represented by the Khoisan) were neither Black in skin tone, nor Negroid in race. But you're trying to claim them with your unscientific blanket term.}

Thought Writes:

So your claiming that Khoian people are not Black?

posted 19 March 2005 11:10 AM            

About 3 million people live in Cape Town, and out of that 3 million, according to the city economic development and tourism directorate, only 867 052 people are “formally” employed. In this city, people of colour are divided into two opposing groups: coloureds and blacks. Just like the French had done in Haiti before the Haitian revolution of 1791, the apartheid regime operated according to a wicked racial hierarchy whereby the coloured people had a favoured status and blacks were at the lowest of the scale. This stupidity that parades as reasoning (i.e. “light black, therefore better than dark black and closer to white”) was observed with reverence during apartheid years, in the post-apartheid little has changed. There still exists between the two groups mistrust, if not an outright hostility, that is perpetuated by white political organisations through using slogans like: “swaart gevaar” (beware of the black).

Fearing the black does not bring the coloured much though, at the end of the day they both run around serving white-folks, both live in poverty, the townships they live in are infested with gangsters, drug peddlers and both live at the far edges of the city – some townships are 40km away from the city. White-folks stay in huge mansions in the city and in the west and north of the city close to the beaches and the famous Table Mountain, protected by high walls, with electric fences and big vicious-looking dogs.

Let me start from the beginning.

Historians when telling the South African story always begin from 1652 when Jan Van Riebeeck arrived at the Cape, this is their first mistake. These historians will go further to tell you that when Mr Van Riebeeck arrived at the Cape the first people he encountered were the Khoisan people, however, one is always given the impression that the Khoisan were not really Black or African, their second mistake. Khoisan were a Black people who had been living in the Southern Africa for more than 8 000 years before the Dutch arrived in the Cape. The Khoisan were made up of two tribes: the Khoikhoi and the San.

Some history books, like the one I did in high school in 1995, made it clear that when Jan Van Riebeeck arrived in the Cape there were no black people, only the Khoisan. The fact that other Blacks have similar physical features as the Khoisan was irrelevant to these so-called scholars and historians.

The fact that Xhosa-speaking people, of which I happen to be one of them, use the same click-sounds in their speech as the Khoisan and the fact that Xhosas share the same religious belief system with the Khoisan is still a source of confusion for many historians.

However, Jan Van Riebeeck was not exactly a sociologist who would find such information fascinating, his only worry was to make enough profits for the Dutch East India Company (DEIC). The DEIC was one of the most profitable multinationals of the seventeen century, and from the start it perceived the Cape as its commercial property. The company was involved in slave trading among many of its shady deals.

The minute these businessmen set foot on the African shores, they went to work – meaning they went to war with the Khoisan, raped their women, stole their land and brought in slaves from India, Indonesia and Madagascar.

Interaction between slaves took place, while at the same time the rape of slaves by slave-masters became a norm. And one fine morning, the slave-masters decided to name the children born out of these circumstances coloured.

For 180 years before slavery was abolished the slaves worked hard and lived in miserable conditions building the economy of the Cape, so that the whites could live a luxurious lifestyle that they still maintain to this day.

SA - Khoisan

SA Deputy President Jacob Zuma - Zulu.

posted 20 March 2005 07:45 AM            

quote:

---

Ethiopians are best described as Caucasoid-Negroid hybrids.

---

posted 20 March 2005 07:58 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought2:
There are NO haplogroup E lineages that have their origins in the Middle East. All E3b1 lineages found in Europe originate in Africa

---

They were introduced to Europe from the Near East, by people who looked like this.

quote:

---

You still have not defined the terms “Negroid” and “Caucasoid”

---

Look them up yourself -- I'm not your teacher. Or, you can just stop pretending not to understand this:

http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/Forum8/HTML/001711.html

quote:

---

southern Europeans who have phenotypic affinities with Nigerians

---

No such thing. You're crazy.

quote:

---

So your claiming that Khoian people are not Black?

---

Exactly:

Another group that has been the subject of much discussion is the Khoisanid peoples (including the Hottentots, San, !Kung). The San (Bushmen) in southern Africa are a group that physically looks quite different from other Negroids. Baker (1974), and Coon (1965) among others, have argued they are as different from Negroids as Caucasoids are, and should be treated as a separate race from other Negroids. The genetic data reported here shows them to differ more from other sub-Saharan Africans than any of the sub-Saharan groups differ from each other (p. 175).

posted 20 March 2005 08:03 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
Sheba [Nubia].

---

Not that impressive, and not built by your ancestors. This here is all your people are capable of producing, and it's what every Afronut is running away from:

posted 20 March 2005 10:32 AM            

quote:

---

lil E writes: Not that impressive

---

quote:

---

Thought writes: You're saying the Khoisan are not Black.

---

quote:

---

lil E writes: Exactly

---

Baby E, still in the business of playing the fool, and ...

...looking every bit the part.

posted 20 March 2005 11:20 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:

They were introduced to Europe from the Near East, by people who looked like this.

[This message has been edited by Evil Euro (edited 20 March 2005).]

---

Thought Writes:

I won’t even address your silly comment on what E3b carrying early Neolithic Balkan populations looked like since they obviously diverse as JL Angel indicated (and as would be expected with a hybrid population). The real issue is where their bloodlines/genes came from. In this regard it is of note that these genetic lineages PASSED THROUGH the “Near East”, but originated in tropical East Africa.

Thought Posts:

J.L.Angel:

“In my own skeletal samples from Greece I note apparent negroid nose and mouth traits in two of fourteen Early Neolithic (sixth millenium B.C.)”

Thought Writes:

P.S.

posted 20 March 2005 11:33 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:

No such thing. You're crazy.

[This message has been edited by Evil Euro (edited 20 March 2005).]

---

Thought Writes:

Sure there is "such a thing". The term Phenotype is defined as the genetically and environmentally determined physical appearance of an organism, esp. as considered with respect to all possible genetically influenced expressions of one specific character. In this sense it is obvious that in some ways Greek populations cluster with northern Europeans. In other ways such as dark eyes and dark hair color they cluster with Bantu speakers from the Congo. Likewise, in some ways Horn of Africa populations cluster with Central African populations and in other ways they do not. The genetic evidence indicates that the while East African Oromo have about 14% Eurasian derived dna, the modern Greeks have greater than 25% African derived dna. It is safe to say that Oromo are much MORE African and the Greeks are much LESS European.

posted 22 March 2005 07:53 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
Very impressive:

---

Still not your people, slave. These here are your people -- naked, primitive and Negroid:

And this is their "greatest" achievement (and the reason you have to steal from Egyptians):

posted 22 March 2005 08:02 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought2:
I won’t even address your silly comment on what E3b carrying early Neolithic Balkan populations looked like since they obviously diverse as JL Angel indicated (and as would be expected with a hybrid population).

---

You won't address it because it proves you wrong. Angel indicates subracial diversity among Neolithic farmers. However, he makes clear that they were all Caucasoids.

quote:

---

J.L.Angel:

“In my own skeletal samples from Greece I note apparent negroid nose and mouth traits in two of fourteen Early Neolithic (sixth millenium B.C.)”

---

Already been explained to your dumb black ass:

http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/Forum8/HTML/001624.html

quote:

---

In other ways such as dark eyes and dark hair color they cluster with Bantu speakers from the Congo.

---

So what? Pigmentation is useless in determining phylogenetic relationships. Swedes would "cluster" with Australian Aborigines based on shared blond hair. That doesn't make the two related or racially similar. Ignorant negro.

quote:

---

It is safe to say that Oromo are much MORE African and the Greeks are much LESS European.

---

posted 23 March 2005 08:04 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
Are they simply more mature than you?

---

No, they're simply as ignorant as you.

posted 23 March 2005 08:21 AM            

SO YOU CAN JUST IMAGINE WHAT THE REAL EXPERTS WOULD DO TO THEM.

posted 23 March 2005 08:46 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by AKOBADAGETH:
[B]GOOD JOB EVIL EURO, AND I BET YOU ARE NOT EVEN A SCHOLAR OR EXPERT IN THIS FIELD .

---

posted 23 March 2005 08:58 AM            

lol, ya think?"

posted 23 March 2005 09:13 AM            

quote:

---

I CANT WAIT TO SEE THE DAY THE DNA TESTING IS DONE ON TH EGYTIAN MUMMIES

---

If you were not so busy emptying bed pans you would know.....

We conducted a molecular investigation of the presence of sicklemia [BENIN-HBS] in six predynastic Egyptian mummies (about 3200 BC) from the Anthropological and Ethnographic Museum of Turin
Marin A, Cerutti N, Massa ER. publié dans Boll. Soc. Ital. Biol. Sper. 1999 May-Jun ;75(5-6):27-30

A study on 12th Dynasty DNA shows that the remains evaluated had multiple lines of descent, including not suprisingly some from "Sub-Saharan" Africa (Paabo and Di Rienzo 1993). The other lineages were not identified, but may also be African in origin"- Egypt in Africa.

So, you've 'seen it', now what?

a) hang yourself
b) go back to emptying bed pans
c) pray for more distortion from Erroneous E

posted 23 March 2005 10:12 AM            

(Paabo and Di Rienzo)

Egypt: In Africa, Celenko

posted 23 March 2005 10:23 AM            

OK WHERE DOES IT STATE THAT THEY WERE NEGROID?

posted 23 March 2005 10:31 AM            

quote:

---

THE FIRST LINK IS CREDIBLE.

---

Likewise....should either you or Erroneous E make a credible statement, we promise to let you know.

quote:

---

OK WHERE DOES IT STATE THAT THEY WERE NEGROID?

---

Non-sequitur - A statement that does not follow logically from what preceded it.

One function of non-sequitors is to allow absolute idiots like Erroneous E. and Abracadbra to argue on into the night with complete disregard to facts.

'supposed Topic': Pre-historic African Climate http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/Forum8/HTML/001735.html