posted 03 May 2005 01:04 PM            

let me say it again

this is the Axum

posted 03 May 2005 04:43 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

All jesting aside, this is what is most impressive, the way the genetics and other disciplines have affirmed the skeletal findings of the African sub-strate in southern Europe.

---

Thought Writes:

J.L. Angel was very clear about the diffusion and hybrid nature of the Greek people.

Regarding the late pleistocene/early Holocene Egypto-Nubian people:

Thought Posts:

The People of Lerna
J.L. Angel

"Egypt includes an almost Mouillian-negroid early population, linear but with extraordinarily broad nose and heavy and deep mouth region, as well as the negroid small-faced and prognathous and broad-nosed trend in the gracile Badarians."

Thought Writes:

Angel goes on to state that these people migrated FROM Egypto-Nubia TO the Levant, Anatolia and Macedonia (Greece):

Thought Posts:

Journal of Human Evolution
(1) 1972
J.L. Angel

"...one can identify Negroid (Ethiopic or Bushmanoid?) traits of nose and prognathism appearing in Natufian latest hunters and in Anatolian and Macedonian first farmers, probably **FROM** Nubia..."

J.L. Angel -

"In my own skeletal samples from Greece I note apparent negroid nose and mouth traits in two of fourteen (14%!!!!) Early Neolithic (sixth millenium B.C.)"

Thought Writes:

Angel DOESN'T attribute these 'Negroid' features to genetic 'Throwback' but to 'ADMIXTURE':

Thought Posts:

Paleopathology at the Origins of Agriculture
Edited by Cohen and Armelagos
1984

Health as a crucial factor in changes from Hunting to developed Farming in the Eastern Mediterranean
By J.L. Angel

"Yet energy remained for considerable cultural achievement partly derived from the fairly high level of variability (a preamble to genetic **MIXTURE**)..."

posted 03 May 2005 05:46 PM            

a bientot
DMc

posted 03 May 2005 09:17 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pimander:
COBRA - can you please define the first image you posted in terms of name, place, era of construction and possibly the identity of the figure crowned with the tower? This is a sincere request and I'd like to thank you in advance for any help you can offer.

a bientot
DMc

---

posted 03 May 2005 10:05 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pimander:
COBRA - can you please define the first image you posted in terms of name, place, era of construction and possibly the identity of the figure crowned with the tower? This is a sincere request and I'd like to thank you in advance for any help you can offer.

a bientot
DMc

---

posted 03 May 2005 10:07 PM            

World Haplogroup Map

http://www.scs.uiuc.edu/~mcdonald/WorldHaplogroupsMaps.pdf

posted 03 May 2005 11:43 PM            

quote:

---

Thought Posts:

World Haplogroup Map

http://www.scs.uiuc.edu/~mcdonald/WorldHaplogroupsMaps.pdf

---

Not surprising, is the wider range of color representation of southern Europe, in terms of Y haplogroups, than in the northern portions. A good example was that of Italy, which appears to be more colorful than even Iberia. The sub-Saharan E3b is clearly represented within that color representation, of course.

posted 04 May 2005 07:00 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
Shut up, Genghis.

Eyelid Form

This feature, which is so important for the differentiation of Europeoid from Mongoloid types, did not reveal any differences among Caucasian [Caucasian means from Caucasus, not 'Caucasoid'] nationalities. Observations of Georgian anthropologists showed certain distinctions of Caucasians from Russians: in the latter the eyefold was somewhat larger, the eye slit somewhat narrower and the position of the orbit a little more inclined. However, it is doubtful if one can consider these characters as being posessed by all Northern Europeoids. The results obtained by the Baltic Expedition, in which the author participated, showed that the Lithuanians, for example, do not disclose any difference from the Caucasians in regard to eyelid structure. In all probability, the distinctions of Russians from Caucasians should not be explained by the fact that the eyelid structure of Northern Europeans is different from that of Southern Europeans, but by the fact that the [b]Russians absorbed elements which are characterized by some Mongoloid traits.

-- Debets G.F., Anthropological Investigations in Daghestan, in Contributions to the Physical Anthropology of the Soviet Union, p. 87

[/B]

---

Wishful thinking again Khallid. Bunak argues, as did Coon that such pseudo-Mongoloid looking features in some Russians could simply be the result of cold-adaptation. The Negroid traits which occur invariably in your swarthy mulatto kin in Sicily are another matter.

posted 04 May 2005 08:01 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought2:
Saying East Africa was a **FEW** degrees cooler during the LGM does not make the UV level non-tropical.

---

Ice Age in Europe = Cooler climate in Africa = Lower levels of sunlight = Less UV radiation

This is common knowledge.

quote:

---

I knew it was racist psuedo-science!

---

Ignorant monkey, if you've never heard of a throwback (or relic, survival, atavism etc.) then you need to go back to Anthropology 101. I can't find a study on humans offhand, but here's a recent study on animals that deals with the reemergence of primitive traits:

Skeletal Atavism in a Miniature Horse

Reid Tyson, DVM, John P. Graham, MVB, MSc, Patrick T. Colahan, DVM, Clifford R. Berry, DVM

Veterinary Radiology & Ultrasound
Volume 45 Issue 4 Page 315 - July 2004

An 8-month-old miniature horse filly was presented for evaluation of severe rotational and angular limb deformities of the thoracic and pelvic limbs. On radiographic examination, complete ulnas and fibulas were identified. These findings are consistent with a condition previously described as a form of atavism. The term atavism is used to describe the reappearance of a trait or character that was seen in all earlier evolutionary specimens of a particular species, but has not been seen in recent ancestors. The atavistic traits of complete ulnas and fibulas have previously been described in Welsh and Shetland Ponies, all of which had severe rotational and angular limb deformities. In this horse, bilateral osteochondritis dissecans of the medial trochlear ridge of the talii were also identified. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first report of the atavistic traits of complete ulnas and fibulas seen in the miniature horse.

quote:

---

The American Association of Physical Anthropologists has rejected the concept of race outright. The term 'Negroid' as C.L. Brace mentioned is a racial term and is useless. Hence those who still ascribe to this worldview are marginal, fanatics who use psuedo-science to justify their feelings of racial hate. Luis et al. 2004 clearly state that E3b originated in 'Sub-Saharan' Africa and spread to Europe/Greece.

---

Translation: You have no anthropological or genetic evidence that refers unambiguously to a sub-Saharan, Negroid racial component in Greece, or clusters Greeks near Africans instead of with Europeans/Caucasoids.

quote:

---

"In my own skeletal samples from Greece I note apparent negroid nose and mouth traits in two of fourteen (14%!!!!) Early Neolithic (sixth millenium B.C.)"

---

*Yawn*

Anthropology:

J. Lawrence Angel on Morphological Types of Greeks

Carleton S. Coon on the Greeks

[ Neolithic Greeks are #7 -- right next to the Neolithic Swiss at #10 ]

Genetics:

posted 04 May 2005 08:10 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Topdog:
Wrong you idiot, Arabs never stepped a foot in Senegal

---

They didn't have to. A mosque is an Islamic structure based on Arabian designs. It doesn't represent native African architecture any more than a skyscraper represents native Japanese architecture. Also, Touba was built in the 20th century with support from the colonial government.

quote:

---

Too bad you forgot about this
http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~tloos/Africa/gz.html

---

Well, it's certainly better than the typical sub-Saharan dung hut. But from a European standpoint, it's really not that impressive.

quote:

---

yet outsiders[Etruscans] literally did have something to do with Italy

---

Yes, "outsiders" from the Aegean who belonged to the same race as all other Southern Europeans.

quote:

---

Nubians built in stone and brick while Rome was still a mudhut city.

---

posted 04 May 2005 08:14 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
Nubians were neither Negroid nor your ancestors.

---

Nubians were not Negroid? Of course they were Negroid, only person unlearned in African history would deny this. As for the Etruscans, modern Italians share very little DNA with them. The closest ones are the Tuscans, who share only two haplotypes with the Etruscans.

posted 04 May 2005 08:17 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:

J.L. Angel was very clear about the diffusion and hybrid nature of the Greek people.

Regarding the late pleistocene/early Holocene Egypto-Nubian people:

Thought Posts:

The People of Lerna
J.L. Angel

"Egypt includes an almost Mouillian-negroid early population, linear but with extraordinarily broad nose and heavy and deep mouth region, as well as the negroid small-faced and prognathous and broad-nosed trend in the gracile Badarians."

Thought Writes:

Angel goes on to state that these people migrated FROM Egypto-Nubia TO the Levant, Anatolia and Macedonia (Greece):

Thought Posts:

Journal of Human Evolution
(1) 1972
J.L. Angel

"...one can identify Negroid (Ethiopic or Bushmanoid?) traits of nose and prognathism appearing in Natufian latest hunters and in Anatolian and Macedonian first farmers, probably **FROM** Nubia..."

J.L. Angel -

"In my own skeletal samples from Greece I note apparent negroid nose and mouth traits in two of fourteen (14%!!!!) Early Neolithic (sixth millenium B.C.)"

Thought Writes:

Angel DOESN'T attribute these 'Negroid' features to genetic 'Throwback' but to 'ADMIXTURE':

Thought Posts:

Paleopathology at the Origins of Agriculture
Edited by Cohen and Armelagos
1984

Health as a crucial factor in changes from Hunting to developed Farming in the Eastern Mediterranean
By J.L. Angel

"Yet energy remained for considerable cultural achievement partly derived from the fairly high level of variability (a preamble to genetic **MIXTURE**)..."

---

Of course:

Greeks share an important part of their genetic pool with sub-Saharan Africans (Ethiopians and west Africans) also supported by Chr 7 Markers. The gene flow from Black Africa to Greece may have occurred in Pharaonic times or when Saharan people emigrated after the present hyperarid conditions were established (5000 years B.C.). Tissue Antigens. 2002 Aug;60(2):111-21.

Most of us are aware of Greek nationalist Dienekes shrill reaction to the above findings.

So I found this comment from him, from the Dodona website amusing:

Of course, western geneticists no longer talk about Caucasoids and Negroids. Let's leave at that: Somalis patrilineages are more related to Greeks.

Of course they are 'related' paternally, they spread from sub-saharan East Africa Somalia TO Greece, just as A Arnaiz-Villena, suggested.

posted 04 May 2005 08:20 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Prodigal:
He thinks Russians with ~2% Mongoloid ancestry are overwhelmingly Mongoloid while saying Sicilians with ~4% Negroid ancestry are almost pure Europeans.

---

Russians have ~6% Mongoloid admixture, while Sicilians have only ~0.7% Negroid admixture according to two comprehensive analyses.

quote:

---

Wishful thinking again Khallid. Bunak argues, as did Coon that such pseudo-Mongoloid looking features in some Russians could simply be the result of cold-adaptation.

---

Slavs cluster with Lapps, Uralics and Central Asians. They're not European, and neither are you.

posted 04 May 2005 08:52 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Topdog:
Nubians were not Negroid? Of course they were Negroid, only person unlearned in African history would deny this.

---

Or a person who can't define their own terms.....

quote:

---

Erroneous sites Columbia Encyclopediat: To the Negroid race belong....the Pygmy groups of Indonesia, and the inhabitants of New Guinea and Melanesia

---

Which is of course, massively in contradiction to Erroneous propaganda....

quote:

---

Erroneous writes: What's been proven is that Negroids are of recent West African origin

---

So, the excuses begin.....

quote:

---

Erroneous writes: Ask the authors of the encyclopedia. I didn't write it.

---

But...you cited it, in response to request for YOUR definition:

quote:

---

Thought writes: Now give us **YOUR** definition of this term that **YOU** use.

---

Yet again Erroneous is reduced to feign denial of his own citations because:

posted 04 May 2005 10:23 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Prodigal:

You have to excuse Khallid for his lack of understanding. He thinks Russians with ~2% Mongoloid ancestry are overwhelmingly Mongoloid while saying Sicilians with ~4% Negroid ancestry are almost pure Europeans. He likes to distance himself from his swarthy kin by obfuscating Negroid traits by calling them throwback traits.

---

Thought Writes:

Prodigal, what is a 'Negroid' and how do YOU determine 'Negroid' ancestry?

posted 04 May 2005 10:30 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:

Ice Age in Europe = Cooler climate in Africa = Lower levels of sunlight = Less UV radiation

This is common knowledge.

---

Thought Writes:

posted 04 May 2005 10:35 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
They didn't have to. A mosque is an Islamic structure based on Arabian designs. It doesn't represent native African architecture any more than a skyscraper represents native Japanese architecture. Also, Touba was built in the 20th century with support from the colonial government.

---

Wrong again, the Touba Mosque was built by the Mouribes Islamic brotherhood. The style of Mosques vary in styles from place to place, as is the case with West Africa, read:

"The style and materials of traditional mosques vary according to the ethnic group and the local environment. The style of mosque known as Soudanese, belonging to the area known as the Western Sudan, is perhaps the most famed. Spanning a vast area from the River Senegal to the Niger Bend, as well as Ghana and the Ivory Coast, these mosques are bound by common building material—clay. Their organic forms are typified by buttressing, the use of toron or wooden stakes used for scaffolding during the yearly process of resurfacing, as well as for decorative purposes, a mihrab tower, a flat roof, and a courtyard. Pillars support the flat roof, and the floor is usually covered with sand, on top of which mats are laid. Illumination is evocatively achieved by holes pierced in the ceiling. Save the massive pillars and their arches, interiors are undecorated, yet far from austere. Rather, their elegant simplicity attests to the lack of distraction between the worshiper and his Creator."
http://www.islamonline.net/English/In_Depth/MuslimAfrica/articles/2005/04/article02.s html

quote:

---

Well, it's certainly better than the typical sub-Saharan dung hut. But from a European standpoint, it's really not that impressive

---

Dung huts aren't typical sub-Saharan idiot, they're used by nomads and peoples who practice transhumance. Great Zimbabwe is a great architectural structure, so great in fact, that Europeans said it was impossible for black Africans to have created. They had to postulate lies about foreigners building, so yes they were very impressive to Europeans. Need more proof? Read some more:

[Graham Connah, African civilizations; Pre-colonial cities and states in tropical Africa: an archaeological perspective, p. 183

"Perhaps it is understandable that a nineteeth-century European, flushed with the excitement of something new and unexplained, should grasp at such an unlikely but respectable biblical explanation. Unfortunately, however, the myth of alien origin for Great Zimbabwe buildings was to survive for a century, even surfacing as a political issue in the troubled times of the 1960s and 1970s(Garlake 1973: 209-10). This was probably because it became psychologically essential for some of the European colonial settlers of this part of Africa. Perhaps the most damaging aspect of the whole African colonial experience was the attempted denial to African peoples of their own cultural heritage, of which the attribution of Great Zimbabwe to outside influence, without a shred of evidence, must be the classic example."

posted 04 May 2005 10:41 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:

Ignorant monkey, if you've never heard of a throwback (or relic, survival, atavism etc.) then you need to go back to Anthropology 101. I can't find a study on humans offhand

---

Thought Writes:

I know what a 'Throwback' is, I asked you for evidence SPECIFIC to your psuedo-scientific theory. There is NO evidence to support relic 'Negroid' traits in Neolithic Greeks or anyone else for that matter. J.L. Angel who actually STUDIED the remains of the Neolithic Greek people attributes thier EXTREME variability to 'MIXTURE'. Angel's work was pre-genetic. Since that time genetic analysis has revealed that the neolithic Natufians dispersed to Greece from the Levant. The Natufians in turn were an amalgamation of Middle Eastern and African people from the Nile Valley. The people of the Nile Valley in turn were:

The People of Lerna
J.L. Angel -

"Egypt includes and almost Mouillian-negroid early population, linear but with extraordinarily broad nose and heavy and deepmouth region, as well as the negroid small-faced and prognathous and broad-nosed trend in the gracile Badarians."

posted 04 May 2005 10:49 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:

Translation: You have no anthropological or genetic evidence that refers unambiguously to a sub-Saharan, Negroid racial component in Greece

---

Thought Writes:

The term 'Negroid' is a psuedo-scientific racial term. It certainly is not genetic as there is no 'Negroid' gene. LOL!

posted 04 May 2005 10:52 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
He hasn't figured out yet that we are using him to conduct a study of racist pseudo-science, the fallacies of their arguments, and the mentality that drives them.

He thinks he's actually 'debating'.

---

And that's exactly what it looks like to us lurking.

posted 04 May 2005 11:10 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

Of course they are 'related' paternally, they spread from sub-saharan East Africa Somalia TO Greece, just as A Arnaiz-Villena, suggested.

---

Thought Writes:

A Arnaiz-Villena recieved a lot of flack when he came out with that revelation. This early work could certainly use some refinement, but his underlying premise was correct as the phylogeography of the Y-Clade E3b reveals. The E3b clade will soon be utilized to revolutionize our understanding of cultural history. As you (Rasol) mentioned, there is a Black East African substratum to the Near East and Southern Europe related to diffusions from tropical Africa within the last 10,000 years. This is important because it was within the Holocene (last 12,000 to 10,000 years) that the critical foundations of complex society ('civilization') were establised.

posted 04 May 2005 12:08 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:

Yet this is not what you were initially claiming. You were claiming that East Africa was non-tropical during the LGM. East Africa was a FEW degrees cooler during the LGM, but still VERY tropical. Hence the ancestors of the Oromo who spread E3b into Eurasia were Black Africans, no way around it.

---

dark skinned is the original state of Homo Sapiens - N. Jablonski

East Africans have been equatorial [dark skinned] for many 10's of thousands of years. - Brace

Erroneous red herring is thus dismissed by Brace and Jablonski. Erroneous can't run away by changing the subject.

posted 04 May 2005 12:17 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:

A Arnaiz-Villena recieved a lot of flack when he came out with that revelation. This early work could certainly use some refinement, but his underlying premise was correct as the phylogeography of the Y-Clade E3b reveals. The E3b clade will soon be utilized to revolutionize our understanding of cultural history. As you (Rasol) mentioned, there is a Black East African substratum to the Near East and Southern Europe related to diffusions from tropical Africa within the last 10,000 years. This is important because it was within the Holocene (last 12,000 to 10,000 years) that the critical foundations of complex society ('civilization') were establised.

[This message has been edited by Thought2 (edited 04 May 2005).]

---

Correct, E3b does ultimately have its roots in sub-Saharan Africa, why does Erroneous E continually miss this quote from Luis et tal's study:

Am. J. Hum. Genet., 74:532-544, 2004

"Since the E3b*-M35 lineages appear to be confined mostly to the sub-Saharan populations, it is conceivable that the initial migrations toward North Africa from the south primarily involved derivative E3b-M35 lineages. These include E3b1-M78, a haplogroup especially common in Ethiopia (23%), and, perhaps, E3b2-M123 (2%), which is present as well (Underhill et al. 2000; Cruciani et al. 2002; Semino et al. 2002)The data suggest that two later expansions may have followed: one eastward along the Levantine corridor into the Near East and the other toward northwestern Africa. The extant North African and Middle Eastern distribution (Underhill et al. 2001b; Cruciani et al. 2002; present study) of these lineages suggests that both routes are associated with the dissemination of E3b1-M78. However, the E3b3-M123 chromosomes may have spread predominantly toward the east, whereas E3b2-M81, which is present in relatively high levels in Morocco (33% and 69% in Moroccan Arabs and Moroccan Berbers, respectively [Cruciani et al. 2002]), dispersed mainly to the west.

posted 04 May 2005 08:45 PM            

HLA genes in Macedonians and the Sub-Saharan origin of the Greeks

A. Arnaiz-Villena et al.
Tissue Antigens
2001: 57: 118-127

"The conclusion is that part of the Greek genetic pool may be Sub-Saharan and that the admixture has occured at an uncertain but ancient time."

Thought Writes:

Semino, Sanchez, Underhill and Crucianni have all demonstrated that (as Rasol first stated) E3b spread FROM Sub-Saharan Africa TO Greece.

Thought Posts:

HLA genes in Macedonians and the Sub-Saharan origin of the Greeks

A. Arnaiz-Villena et al.
Tissue Antigens
2001: 57: 118-127

"Both the Oromo and Amharic peoples live in the Ethiopian mountains. They **OBVIOUSLY** have in common a genetic background with the west-African groups...."

Thought Writes:

A) Genetics indicate that E3a and E3b are both subclades of the common East African derived PN2/E3 clade AFTER the OOA Movement and BEFORE the LGM.

B) In that West and East Africans derive from a common source (E3/PN2) East and West Africans have shared derived traits.

Thought Posts:

HLA genes in Macedonians and the Sub-Saharan origin of the Greeks

A. Arnaiz-Villena et al.
Tissue Antigens
2001: 57: 118-127

"Thus, it is hypothesized that there could have been a migration FROM southern **SAHARA** which mixed with ancient Greeks to give rise to a part of the present day Greek genetic background."

Thought Posts:

http://www.geocities.com/juanjosecastillos/english.html

S. di Lernia, M. Cremaschi and F. Merighi,

Hunter-gatherers of the Central Sahara: a reassessment

"The pottery found includes many sherds that were decorated with incised geometrical motifs and is among the oldest in North Africa (9 to 10,000 BC). The few human remains found seem to have affinities (gene pool) with sub-Saharan populations."

posted 05 May 2005 07:51 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought2:
Yet this is not what you were initially claiming. You were claiming that East Africa was non-tropical during the LGM. East Africa was a FEW degrees cooler during the LGM, but still VERY tropical. Hence the ancestors of the Oromo who spread E3b into Eurasia were Black Africans, no way around it.

---

In what sense are you using "tropical"? Of course, East Africa has always been located in the region known as the tropics, but it hasn't always been a sweltering savanna. Before the Holocene it was a cool, dry desert:

How many times will this have to be explained to you before your inferior negro "brain" is able to grasp it?

Note that pre-historic East Africans probably had light brown skin like the Khoisan (or a little lighter since the San are now part Bantu and adapted to the Holocene climate). But they certainly were not the same color as modern Negroids, nor the same race.

And of course, E3b is Caucasoid. No way around it.

posted 05 May 2005 07:57 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Topdog:
Nubians were not Negroid? Of course they were Negroid, only person unlearned in African history would deny this.

---

Population of Nubia up to the 16th Century BC

Aleksandra Pudlo, Anthropological Review, 1999

"Starting from the Late Neolithic...similarities between the Nubians and the populations of Northeast Africa...and Asia...became even more distinct, which may prove the existence of strong ties derived probably from influx of the Caucasoids from the regions of Levant, Mesopotamia, and India. They were coming to Nubia through the Sinai Peninsula, but probably also through the south Saudi Arabia. The Kerma series from Upper Nubia shows particular similarities to the present-day Indian series.

"From the Neolithic on, or possibly even earlier, the strategic location of Nubia, promoting contacts between various populations, started to bring about effects in the form of the civilizational development of this region. Finally, these two factors led to the Hamitisation process, whereby superimposition of the Caucasoids on the Negroids took place."

quote:

---

As for the Etruscans, modern Italians share very little DNA with them. The closest ones are the Tuscans, who share only two haplotypes with the Etruscans.

---

What does that have to do with anything? Etruscans were Mediterranean Caucasoids like many Italians and other Europeans.

quote:

---

The style of Mosques vary in styles from place to place, as is the case with West Africa, read:

---

posted 05 May 2005 08:01 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Topdog:
Correct, E3b does ultimately have its roots in sub-Saharan Africa, why does Erroneous E continually miss this quote from Luis et tal's study?:

Am. J. Hum. Genet., 74:532-544, 2004

"Since the E3b*-M35 lineages appear to be confined mostly to the sub-Saharan populations, it is conceivable that the initial migrations toward North Africa from the south primarily involved derivative E3b-M35 lineages.

---

The question was no doubt rhetorical.

As we all know...it could not be any more clear:

quote:

---

Y-Chromosome analysis of the Somali population

Sanchez et al.
"The frequency of haplogroup E3b1 (E-M78) in Somali males is the highest observed in **ANY** populations to date, and we suggest that the Somali male population is the origin of this haplogroup.

---

posted 05 May 2005 08:53 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Posts:

HLA genes in Macedonians and the Sub-Saharan origin of the Greeks

A. Arnaiz-Villena et al.
Tissue Antigens
2001: 57: 118-127

"The conclusion is that part of the Greek genetic pool may be Sub-Saharan and that the admixture has occured at an uncertain but ancient time."

Thought Writes:

Semino, Sanchez, Underhill and Crucianni have all demonstrated that (as Rasol first stated) E3b spread FROM Sub-Saharan Africa TO Greece.

Thought Posts:

HLA genes in Macedonians and the Sub-Saharan origin of the Greeks

A. Arnaiz-Villena et al.
Tissue Antigens
2001: 57: 118-127

"Both the Oromo and Amharic peoples live in the Ethiopian mountains. They **OBVIOUSLY** have in common a genetic background with the west-African groups...."

Thought Writes:

A) Genetics indicate that E3a and E3b are both subclades of the common East African derived PN2/E3 clade AFTER the OOA Movement and BEFORE the LGM.

B) In that West and East Africans derive from a common source (E3/PN2) East and West Africans have shared derived traits.

Thought Posts:

HLA genes in Macedonians and the Sub-Saharan origin of the Greeks

A. Arnaiz-Villena et al.
Tissue Antigens
2001: 57: 118-127

"Thus, it is hypothesized that there could have been a migration FROM southern **SAHARA** which mixed with ancient Greeks to give rise to a part of the present day Greek genetic background."

Thought Posts:

http://www.geocities.com/juanjosecastillos/english.html

S. di Lernia, M. Cremaschi and F. Merighi,

Hunter-gatherers of the Central Sahara: a reassessment

"The pottery found includes many sherds that were decorated with incised geometrical motifs and is among the oldest in North Africa (9 to 10,000 BC). The few human remains found seem to have affinities (gene pool) with sub-Saharan populations."

---

Good points.

Erroneous is whipped and behaving accordingly:

* attempt to change subject of this thread.

* tries to run away by starting a different thread in hopes of getting fresh start for his rotty old garbage.

* refuse to reply to on-topic posts, though i can't blame him, what with the beating he's taking.

Erroneous flight response:

quote:

---

If Angel's "negroid nose and mouth traits" represent black racial admixture....

---

quote:

---

then where are the other Negroid traits?

---

So why are you asking a question about hypothetical racial archtypes when -

"Racialists models which imply non-overlapping gene pools, are clearly negated by Professor Angel's work." - Keita.

quote:

---

Where's the Negroid hair type... pigmentation etc.?

---

Answer: Angel is assessing skeletal remains, not pigment and hair.

"Negroid... from Nubia" (L. Angel)... remains unaddressed via your usual troll-bag of red herrings, non-sequiturs, strawman and race baiting rhetoric, as in...

quote:

---

Funny how these Nomadic Neolithic Niggas

---

quote:

---

transmitted only two of their traits to the Levantines and Greeks

---

You mean these traits (?)....

Pete Sampras.

Prince Bandar.

Yes, and?

What's really funny is that the way you are implicitly admitting the truth, in spite of yourself.

posted 05 May 2005 09:44 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:

In what sense are you using "tropical"? Of course, East Africa has always been located in the region known as the tropics, but it hasn't always been a sweltering savanna. Before the Holocene it was a cool, dry desert:

[This message has been edited by Evil Euro (edited 05 May 2005).]

---

Thought Writes:

I am using the term tropical in the 'sense' that it is currently used: To represent the mean temperature found in the nations of Africa between the tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn. Saying East Africa was 'Cooler' will not suffice in proving that this region was non-tropical. There are many regions within tropical Africa today that are hotter and cooler than one another, yet still tropical. So once again I pose the SAME question to you:

Please provide ONE study that states East Africa was NON-Tropical during the period in question? You won't because it was not!

posted 05 May 2005 09:56 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

Erroneous is whipped and behaving accordingly:

* attempt to change subject of this thread.

* tries to run away by starting a different thread in hopes of getting fresh start for his rotty old garbage.

* refuse to reply to on-topic posts, though i can't blame him, what with the beating he's taking.

---

Thought Writes:

posted 05 May 2005 10:37 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:

On 5/3/05 at 11:01 AM, Thought wrote:

quote:

The term 'Negroid' as C.L. Brace mentioned is a racial term and is useless.

On 5/3/05 at 4:43 PM, Thought posted:

quote:

"In my own skeletal samples from Greece I note apparent negroid nose and mouth traits in two of fourteen (14%!!!!) Early Neolithic (sixth millenium B.C.)"

So racial terms are invalid...until Afronuts need them to lay claim to someone else's achievements. The stupid monkey couldn't even wait a whole day to contradict himself.

---

Thought Writes:

Easy question to answer. J.L. Angel’s use of terminology PREDATES modern genetic analysis. Of course there is really NO need to use Angel's work to support a diffusion FROM Sub-Saharan Africa TO Greece because that FACT has been establised through the study of the Greek blood/DNA.

Race is a social construct. There is no biological basis to race. Africans are variable. The term 'Negroid' can be used as a arbitrary device to support the outdated model of 'Race'. I perfer the term tropical African to 'Negroid' in that it captures the RANGE of diversity found Africa as mentioned in:

Apportionment of global human genetic diversity based on craniometrics and skin color

JH Relethford

American Journal of Physical Anthropology
2002

Thought Continues To Teach Evil E:

Humans may look similar or dissimilar yet be or not be closely related. Genetic analysis indicates that Mesolithic East and West Africans derive from a common source that post-dates the Out-Of-Africa Migration and pre-dates the Last Glaicial Maximum. Hence east and west Africans have SOME shared derived traits and they also have some unique traits that grade on a region specific basis. But even within specific regions such as West Africa humans have variable degrees of limb attenuation, eye and hair color, hair texture, melanin level and height. Hence a term such as 'Negroid' really has no scientific value. All of these people from East to West Africa share in a common bloodline (E3/PN2) and have common shared derived phenotypic traits. Some of these tropical African traits (genetic and phenotypic) have spread TO Eurasia within the last 14,000 years.

A good example are modern East African Oromo and modern European Greeks. The East African people are directly ancestral to modern Greeks, yet the two people look very different. The physical traits Angel mentioned are indicative of tropical adaptation. Greece is not in the tropics. Greek ancestors came from the tropics of Sub-Saharan Africa, hence they brought tropical African phenotypic traits with them. This is not rocket science.

Now I have a question for you. You claim that Greeks are really European. All European people came out of one of three refuges (Franco-Cantabrian, Balkan and Ukraine) after the Last Glacial Maximum. Please tell me which refuge the Greeks came out of? I say they are NOT European and did not come out of any post-LGM refuge based upon DNA, but I would like to see your answer?

posted 05 May 2005 12:24 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
Starting from the Late Neolithic...similarities between the Nubians and the populations of Northeast Africa...and Asia...became even more distinct, which may prove the existence of strong ties derived probably from influx of the Caucasoids from the regions of Levant, Mesopotamia, and India. They were coming to Nubia through the Sinai Peninsula, but probably also through the south Saudi Arabia. The Kerma series from Upper Nubia shows particular similarities to the present-day Indian series.

---

Note: none of what Pudlov postulated has any genetic nor archaeological backing. You're posting a paper that uses the old long debunked "Hamitic Hypothesis" to explain diversity in Nubians. You're too stupid and blind to even see that especially when it says this:

" Finally, these two factors led to the Hamitisation process, whereby superimposition of the Caucasoids on the Negroids took place."

Hamitic hypothesis back in action after being long debunked. Nothing else needs to be said. If these peoples came from the Middle East where no "Hamitic" speaking people existed, why is the author using "Hamitisation ?" Furthermore, what is Hamitisation? Neither the author, nor you can define that term.

"What does that have to do with anything? Etruscans were Mediterranean Caucasoids like many Italians and other Europeans."

This has jack to do with race and Caucasoids, the fact remains that Rome was a city of mudhuts until the Etruscans came in and civilised them, bringing in a much higher culture. Arabs never did the same in sub-Saharan Africa. From the Swahili to the Western Sudan, the culture was Islamicised African and distinct from Arabs. The fact remains that the Etruscans were invaders from outside of Italy who brought civilisation to Italy at a time when Negroid Nubians were already in a high state of civilisation. Race isn't the matter here its culture. The Etruscans regardless of their race , have no little to do genetically with modern Italians. Loser.

posted 05 May 2005 02:18 PM            

Thesis Title:

Beyond the Racial Paradigm: Exploring New Perspectives on Human Variation

Historic anthropological conceptions of human cultural and biological variation have focused predominantly on racial classification, based on the variation and distribution of visible (phenotypic) traits such as skin colour and hair texture across living populations. Modern approaches suggest that if racial groups are based on single phenotypic variables such as skin colour, genetic (genotypic) or quantitative traits are unlikely to show the same patterns of variation (Relethford 2002; Cavalli-Sforza & Cavalli-Sforza 1995:117). Despite genetic evidence demonstrating that human populations do not compose discrete and non-overlapping groups, ambiguous references to race and racial characteristics in data interpretation and the development of taxonomic and evolutionary models remain common in physical anthropology, and especially forensic anthropology. While physical anthropologists generally acknowledge the socially constructed nature of the race concept, their traditional methods of skeletal analysis focus on the basic level of the phenotype as an objective indicator of ancestral affinity (Hooton 1946). In terms of human biology, racial classifications do indeed express valuable characteristics of human variation, but may do so in crude and misleading ways (Harrison et al. 1977:184). Although human genetic studies are yielding vast amounts of information regarding human history, diversity, and variation, contemporary anthropological approaches to racial classification continue to fail, both philosophically and methodologically, to account for the incongruous nature of phenotypic and genotypic variation.

Modern anthropology arose in the late nineteenth century out of the study of culture as an evolutionary process. Attempts to reconstruct human history along a model of unilinear evolution within a (presumably) predictable structure of progressive cognitive and social development fundamentally misunderstood Darwinian theory and placed racial groups on a hierarchical scale of biological evolution and achievement (Mukhopadhyay & Moses 1997). Twentieth and twenty-first century anthropologists have sought to dispel such myths of culture and biology being fundamentally interconnected, but our advanced understanding of the variation of both biology and culture has done little to change anthropological racial categories or the methods from which they are derived. Ann Stoler (1997) approaches this issue by examining the “fixities and fluidities” in racial discourse and identifies the problem that contemporary racial histories appear as “redemptive scripts” rather than objective scientific corrections. My thesis will follow and build upon Stoler’s argument, examining how cultural and scientific studies of race have played complementary roles in the misunderstanding of human variation, and through critical engagement with literature regarding the psychological necessity of categorization and the reification of folk taxonomies (Atran 1996; Bowker & Starr 1999; Hacking [1986] 1999; Hirschfeld 1998).

While much has also been written about the intellectual history of the race concept, particularly on its development within natural history from the Classical period to the Enlightenment (Foucault 1970), clarification of how this concept fits practically into contemporary scientific scholarship remains inadequate: race continues to be one of the most ambiguous terms in both social and scientific usage. The problem of irreconcilable differences between morphological (phenotypic) and molecular (genotypic) types of evidence in the reconstruction of evolutionary relationships is one that implicitly links anthropology to the disciplines of biology and genetics. The fundamental methodological problem facing systematic taxonomy across these disciplines is the philosophical disjunction between Linnaean taxonomy, based on the notion of static species, and Darwinian evolution, which sees species in a constant state of change. Within evolutionary biology, this disagreement has been approached through three main strategies of relational analysis: comparative morphology through evolutionary taxonomy (Mayr 1942); statistical relationships through numerical taxonomy (Sokal & Sneath 1963); and primitive and derived characteristics by means of cladistics (Hennig [1966] 1999). Yet, little has been accomplished in reconciling the relationship between static (Linnaean) and dynamic (Darwinian) approaches (Gould 1992). The philosophical dimension of my research project will focus on the nature of classificatory systems as applied to evolutionary relationships, and debates over the objectivity of various taxonomic schemes during the past century (Hull 1984; Wilson 1999).

Philosophical arguments over the arbitrary nature of classificatory schemes and the irreconcilability of phenotypic and genotypic traits both suffer at the level of analysis. For example, Andreason (1998, 2000) argues that cladistic races and social constructivism are compatible, and that if cladistic analysis is applied to the level of subspecies rather than exclusively to species (as is most common), new ways to define race biologically in relation to humans and other species will become apparent. However, such arguments are weakly supported conceptually and offer little in terms of the resolution of Linnaean and Darwinian perspectives on biological species or debates over objectivity and subjectivity in taxonomic applications. While classification is, by its very nature, an arbitrary endeavour, debates continue to focus abstractly on the objectivity/subjectivity of such systems. Similarly, the incongruence between genotype and phenotype has led few researchers to work toward an understanding of their relationship.

The fundamental philosophical questions to be addressed in this project concern the basic level of analysis: are current philosophical and methodological approaches to racial classification too abstract to be effective? If we view nature as objective and taxonomy as subjective – existing only in the human realm (Gould 1996) – can any system of classification effectively bridge that objective/subjective divide? Further, if data at the molecular level are seen as reflecting the objectivity of natural processes and the anthropological study of osteological variation as analyzing only the level of phenotype, can these two divergent perspectives be reconciled in order to build a more advanced picture of human variation? A comprehensive understanding of their relationship, which is environmental in nature, since the (phenotypic) expression of genetically coded traits are always influenced by external (environmental) factors, seems to be the fundamental barrier, both philosophically and methodologically, to moving beyond entrenched notions of racial variation in general.

My secondary questions thus run parallel to the static/dynamic conundrum in evolutionary biology outlined in my first set of questions: how can notions of race and culture evolve in the realm of cultural anthropology, yet remain static in terms of physical anthropological approaches? Specifically, what alternative models for understanding human variation have been proposed (e.g. Montagu 1997; Molnar 2002), and why have they failed to elicit practical solutions? Many questions regarding anthropology as the “science of culture” and modern disciplinary fragmentation can be drawn out of the history of anthropological study in this context, comparing cultural perspectives to those of physical (or biological) anthropology, including paleoanthropology and the emerging field of molecular anthropology (Marks 2002; Lieberman & Jackson 1995). Specific focus will be on the practical confines of forensic anthropology, which became the major site for debate over the application of racial categories in the early 1990s (Sauer 1992; Brace 1995; Kennedy 1995). Though many of its practitioners contend that more advanced methods of ancestral determination are necessary (Brues 1992; Kennedy & Chiment 1992), and that the race debates have only served to retard such progress (Sauer 1993), arguments that racial categories are necessary to convey socially understandable (racial) information in the medico-legal context are persistently made. In failing to provide progressive methods of ancestral determination, and continually relying on outdated methods of racial determination, forensic anthropologists are neglecting the scientific questions that lead to increased understanding of human variation and accuracy in their determinations.

Overall, my project will offer a comprehensive analysis of the race concept across various disciplines, in order to discuss the nature and validity of the concept itself, and the history of its differential application to humans. Although many models helping us to understand the ways in which sub-specific populations vary within biological species have been developed, no comprehensive understanding of human biological variation yet exists. With analytical methodologies suffering from the underlying philosophical problems inherent in traditional taxonomic schemes, the results of this project will provide a conceptual basis for developing new perspectives on human variation, and the biological history of the species Homo sapiens sapiens. My primary goal is to provide a framework for both teaching human variation and developing specific hypotheses based on already completed osteological research, which can be tested through future osteological analysis. This goal can only be achieved by exploring the nature of human evolution and variation rather than by adhering to misleading and artifactual conceptions.

Thought Writes:

The racial and non-racial schools are two extremes along the same line of reason. The issue is not relative relationship (non-racial school) OR absolute relationship (racial school), the real issue is PRIMARY relationship as noted by Keita.

posted 06 May 2005 07:46 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought2:
Please provide ONE study that states East Africa was NON-Tropical during the period in question? You won't because it was not!

---

I already have. The study I keep posting -- and you keep ignoring -- says that "Over 90% of this period [the Quaternary] has been cooler and dryer than the Holocene, so contemporary [i.e. tropical] conditions are unrepresentative". It goes on to call the period the "(low latitude) 'Desert Age' ", which was shaped by the 'Ice Age' occurring at a higher latitude. Read between the lines, monkey. Climates at ALL latitudes were much, much colder than they are now. This isn't rocket science.

quote:

---

I perfer the term tropical African...

---

posted 06 May 2005 07:55 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Topdog:
Hamitic hypothesis back in action after being long debunked.

---

By whom? You? Afronut "scholars"? Don't make me laugh.

quote:

---

Nothing else needs to be said.

---

Exactly, because you've been proven wrong by Aleksandra Pudlo, Anthropological Review, 1999.

quote:

---

Rome was a city of mudhuts until the Etruscans came in and civilised them, bringing in a much higher culture. Arabs never did the same in sub-Saharan Africa. From the Swahili to the Western Sudan, the culture was Islamicised African and distinct from Arabs.

---

posted 06 May 2005 09:05 AM            

quote:

---

Thought writes: I prefer the term tropical African...

---

quote:

---

Erroneous writes: because it's imprecise

---

Wrong again.

Dr. Sonia R. Zakrzewski examined Ancient Egyptian remains and found them to be of tropical (Nilotic) form.

She was precise enough to determine that Howells database was flawed and unrepresentative of Ancient Egyptians.

Modern bioanthropologists as diverse as Keita and Brace, understand that the human form adapts somatically to its environment. This approach to understanding human morphology is scientific.

Your ideological approach is anachronistic, and quite precisely qualifies as pseudoscience -

Pseudoscience relies heavily on anachronistic thinking.

The older the idea, the more attractive it is to pseudoscience:

- especially if the idea is transparently wrong and has long been discarded by science.

- Pseudoscience contradicts itself
- invents its own terms
- uses terms that are vaguely defined or have no-definition at all. http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/Forum8/HTML/001807.html

This perfectly describes your ideology and inability to define your terms.

If you can't accept this, then write the scientists and tell them to stop discussing morphological adaptation to climate.

Tell them to return to the 19th century and the works of Carleton Coon, while you're at it you can write the surgeons and tell them to abandon anesthetic and hypodermics and return to liquor and leeches. .

You merely argue out of ignorance, in defense of racism, which is no argument at all.

Erroneous: The world has moved on and left you for dead. You need to grow up, while you still can.

posted 06 May 2005 09:36 AM            

quote:

---

Thought writes: Now I have a question for you. You claim that Greeks are really European. All European people came out of one of three refuges (Franco-Cantabrian, Balkan and Ukraine) after the Last Glacial Maximum. Please tell me which refuge the Greeks came out of? I say they are NOT European and did not come out of any post-LGM refuge based upon DNA, but I would like to see your answer

---

What's taking so long?

posted 06 May 2005 12:43 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought:

Please provide ONE study that states East Africa was NON-Tropical during the period in question? You won't because it was not!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil E:

I already have. The study I keep posting -- and you keep ignoring -- says that "Over 90% of this period [the Quaternary] has been cooler and dryer than the Holocene, so contemporary [i.e. tropical] conditions are unrepresentative".

---

Thought Writes:

Tisk, tisk, tisk.... Evil E has resorted to fudging his sources to prove his point. The SOURCE does NOT say that there were no tropical regions in Africa and Asia during the period in question, YOU enjected that statement out of desparation. The SOURCE simply states that the earth was "cooler and dryer than the Holocene, so contemporary conditions are unrepresentative". Cooler and dryer does not equal non-tropical. There is a RANGE of climate in the tropics, hence if East Africa were a LITTLE cooler does not mean this region was non-tropical. For example if Somalia is typically 90 degrees fahrenheit and fell to 82 degrees fahrenheit during part of the LGM it was STILL well within the RANGE of the tropics. Again, there is no need to attempt a deception. You are simply wrong!

Thought Posts:

http://www.esd.ornl.gov/projects/qen/new_africa.html

The Horn of Africa During the Last Glacial Maximum:

"Conditions over other parts of Ethiopea are a matter of conjecture. With the evidence of drying in the highlands and the rift valley region, we suggest that TROPICAL desert covered much of the Horn of Africa."

Thought Posts:

Black Athena Revisted
Edited by Lefkowitz and Rogers
1996

Clines and Clusters versus Race
Brace et al.

"An EARLIER generation of anthropologists TRIED to explain face form in the Horn of Africa as the result of admixture from hypothetical 'wandering Caucasoids', but that explaination FOUNDERS on the paradox of why that supposedly potent 'Caucasoid' people contributed a dominant quantity of genes for nose and face form but none for skin color and limb proportions. It makes far BETTER SENSE to regard the adaptively significant features seen in the Horn of Africa as soely an IN SITU response on the part of separate adaptive traits to the selective forces present in the hot, dry tropics of eastern Africa. From the observation that 12,000 years was NOT a long enough interval to produce ANY noticeable variation in pigment by latitude in the New World and that 50,000 years has been barely long enough to produce the beginnings of a gradation in Australia, one would have to argue that the inhabitants of the Upper Nile and East African Horn of Africa have been EQUATORIAL for many TENS of THOUSANDS of years."

Thought Writes:

Hence the science is clear:

A) The E3a and E3b are bloodline/genetic siblings. East and West Africans share in a common bloodline (E3/PN2) and have common shared derived traits such as melanin levels and limb elongation.

B) E3b spread FROM BLACK/TROPICAL Horn of Africa TO Southern Europe with the Mesolithic migrations of Advanced African Foragers and Hunters.

C) The original people of the Horn of Africa were TROPICAL/BLACK Africans for TENS of THOUSANDS of years.

D) Few if any of the genes found in modern Horn of Africa populations spread to this region since the LGM. Hence the modern Black Horn of Africa populations look much like their ancestors that spread E3b to Eurasia less than 14,000 years ago.

E) Modern Greeks are hybrid, part European, part Middle Eastern and part Black African as the M35 lineage and the Benin Haplotype Sickle Cell Variant demonstrates.

F) Modern Greeks cannot trace the a predominate portion of their gene pool to any of the LGM European Glacial Refuges. Unlike the REAL European populations that came out of the Balkan and Ukraine Refuges, the Greeks carry the DEFINING European haplogroup Hg I at low frequencies like the Lebanese.

G) All of this OVERWHELMING evidence supports the contentions of J.L. Angel who claimed that 'Negroid' or more appropriately EQUATORIAL AFRICAN traits of nose and prognathism spread TO the Natufians and Early Anatolian and Macedonian first farmers via NUBIA!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:

...because it's imprecise and enables you to encompass all sorts of non-Negroid and part-Caucasoid groups into your pan-African "race".

---

Thought Writes:

Once again, the term 'Negroid' is a racial construct. 'Race' is now considered psuedo-science by mainstream anthropology. In addition, the term 'Negroid' can be utilized in an arbitrary manner by psuedo-scientists. These same psuedo-scientists would contrive to make everyone from Tony Blair to V.J. Singh "Caucasoid' to support the MYTH of White Supremacy. Black African or simply indigenous African captures the range, variation and underlying unity that is found in Africa.

posted 06 May 2005 01:10 PM            

quote:

---

The Horn of Africa During the Last Glacial Maximum:

"Conditions over other parts of Ethiopea are a matter of conjecture. With the evidence of drying in the highlands and the rift valley region, we suggest that TROPICAL desert covered much of the Horn of Africa."

---

Tropical desert areas actually receive greater UV than wetter areas.

Most natively "rain forest" peoples of Africa, the diminuative types - do not generally have the darkest skin tones. They are typically dark brown, reddish brown and yellowish brown. The darkest skintones are often found in areas that are equatorial in terms of UV and also sunny...not cloud covered forest.

The highest UV and temperature levels in the world are found in the desert areas in the horn.

Dalol Ethiopia presently has a daytime average temperature of 40c/104f. This was likely the hottest/sunniest region of the Earth during the Holocene as well.

Of course there are highlands and coastal areas in East AND West Africa that are not as warm, but this all moot as we all know....

East Africans have been "equatorial" [dark skinned] for many 10's of thousand of years. - Brace.

Run Erroneous Run!!!

posted 06 May 2005 01:18 PM            

quote:

---

Neither ancient nor modern Greeks have any African blood.

---

But, of course they do as modern science unanimously and incontrovertably attests:

posted 06 May 2005 01:26 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

That most natively "rain forest" peoples of Africa, the diminuative types - do not generally have the darkest skin tones. They are typically dark brown, reddish brown and yellowish brown. The darkest skintones are often found in areas that are equatorial in terms of UV and also sunny...not cloud covered forest.

---

Thought Writes:

That is a great point. You beat me to the punch on that one. The Biaka people have melanin levels similar to some Berber and San people. The stereotype of the "True Negro" or "Negroid" is a perfect example of psuedo-science at its WORST. Genetics has put the psuedo-scientific racists into a tail-spin. They will soon find themselves in a position of either acknowledging the tropical African roots of the Greeks or disassociating themselves from Greece alltogether to save their 'pristine' culture. Of course if they give up on Greece all they have left is the Druids.

LOL!

posted 06 May 2005 01:35 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought:

Genetics has put the psuedo-scientific racists into a tail-spin. They will soon find themselves in a position of either acknowledging the tropical African roots of the Greeks or disassociating themselves from Greece alltogether to save their 'pristine' culture. Of course if they give up on Greece all they have left is the Druids.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Horemheb:

We can use phoney academics to back up anything.

---

Thought Writes:

Of course their third option is to simply reject science all together.

posted 06 May 2005 01:49 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
Learn something about cultural diffusion, moron. Islamic civilization is Arabic, not African.

---

Wrong idiot, Islamic civilisation doesn't equal Arab since most of those people who contributed to Islamic civilisation were not Arabs. Songhai, Mali, and Ghana were Islamicised AFRICAN civilisations, the people were and still are culturally distinct from Arabs. Have you ever read the works of Arab historians such as Ibn Battuta? His writings do in fact demonstrate the the differences are very manifest, you are a deluded moron who spams the internet and google posting old diffusionist trash as absolute truth.

quote:

---

It doesn't matter whether it was brought to Africa by Arab settlers or arrived there by some indirect means. It's just as much of a foreign element as Etruscan civilization in Italy.

---

Wrong again idiot, most of the people in Islamicised African civilisations like Mali, Songahi, and Ghana were not Islamicised, just the upper classes. Urbanisation and building in stone was already in place before any Islamic influence. Islam was very slow to take affect in Sudanic African kingdoms and when it did it became heavily Africanised, nothing close to being Arabised.

quote:

---

The only difference is that the Italians built on what they learned and made huge contributions to world culture. Black Africans are still savages.

---

In your deluded dreams.