posted 28 August 2005 07:30 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Babbling Ape:
the study in question...

---

...has already been explained to your dumb monkey ass:

* EA1 (R1b/I) and EA2 (E3b/J2/G) = Both Caucasoid

* "Pale" and "Dark" = Recent climatic adaptations

~80% E3b + Caucasoid mtDNA = Dark Caucasoid

~80% E3b + Negroid mtDNA = Racially Hybrid

~95% R1b/I + European mtDNA = Dark Caucasoid

But thanks for confirming with your nigger spam that after six months you still have no answers for any of the maps I posted.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super coon:
“…East Africans were separated from **the rest of ** the sub-Saharan populations (Figure 2, axis 2) mainly by the different frequencies of haplogroup E3b1.” - Sanchez et al.

---

posted 28 August 2005 02:11 PM            

quote:

---

ginney pussy:
Exactly. E3b-carrying East Africans are **not genetically** sub-Saharan African.

---

Exactly what, ginney ho? ...that you don't make sense! That statement you are replying to, of course, doesn't **mean** nor **states** what your barren wop vessel infers from it. What is "not genetically sub-Saharan" supposed to mean? or better yet, show any study that makes that statement of Hg E3b! Sanchez has unnecessarily [for the literate] noted repetitively, that we are dealing with "sub-Saharan" populations of the African Horn. To the literates, the meaning is a given, in that the **indigenous E3b** is also sub-Saharan; there is simply no such thing as, indigenous sub-Saharan tropical East Africans bearing "indigenous" sub-Saharan E3b lineages that are “not genetically sub-Saharan”, but then, we haven't forgotten that "females are Y chromosome carriers" in your fairy tale land.

In the head of an emotionally & mentally unstable wop, this is what makes sense…

"Indigenous European Hg I is **"not genetically European** in indigenous European bearers."

…which should be a demonstration that ginney wop is not intellectually in a position to be able to answer...

quote:

---

As Richards et al demonstrated, the presence of recent sub-Saharan Hg E and Asian Hg J in dark skin outlier Meds, pulls them away from the REAL Europeans, and puts them in b/n the Near Easterners (who carry the same sub-Saharan and Asian lineages amongst others) and the REAL Europeans. But varying frequencies of Hg R and Hg N3 in outlier dark skin Meds, keeps them in the middle.

So now that every single wop straw has been squashed swiftly and concisely, emotionally fragile wop, how about answers for the following:

• What haplotypes are considered “Niger Congo” mtDNA in the Ethiopian gene pool? Where is the Borana sample that Passarino et al, 1998, studied? And what does “Niger Congo” lineages have to do with the Borana?

• The E3b1 lineages in East African populations, with highest found in Cushitic speakers like the Borana, are indigenous sub-Sahara tropical African lineages. How does admixture or gene flow into east Africa, disqualify this fact any way?

• Recent E3b lineages in southern Europe, including E3a and HBS are all sub-Saharan. These people are genetically closer to sub-Saharan Africans, than the non-outlier Europeans carrying Hg R1b and Hg I in high frequencies. Where does Sanchez et al., 2005, state that E3b is genetically closer to Eurasian J and K, more than its sister PN2 E3a?
  

---

…, a vindication of a finished business!

Nor intellectually in a position to understand [the Wetton study]…

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
That is exactly the case. The study sorts into precisely 6 distinct ethnic appearance {EA} groups.

Ea1 [pale Europeans] is essentially native European and described as homogeneous in appearance as well as genetic lineage.

Ea2 [dark Europeans] is a combination of European, African and West Asian and so described as heterogeneous.

Heterogeneous means Consisting of dissimilar elements or parts.

In this case heterogeneous means that EA2 has substantial paternity from the lineages that define group Ea3 [Afro-Caribbean] and Ea6 [Mid-Eastern].

Simplifying, Wetton is saying that pale whites of Northern Europe and dark whites of the medit are not only two different looking EA or ethnic appearance groups, but that they have two very different ancestries, one overwhelmingly European - the other European, African and West Asian.

You can call these two different groups "Aryans" if it makes you feel better -I believe facist Mussolini was the 1st to white-wash medit. diversity by declaring that Italians were 'Aryan', but it simply has no bearing on the actual ethnic appearance and genetic distinctiveness related by Wetton.

Frankly, there is nothing in this study that we did not know, before it was conducted, just some things that are denied and were again revealed [par for the course], such as E3a from West Africa showing up in Medits, yet again.

As with L lineages [over 11% in parts of Portugal], Dienekes and co. keep denying it, only to have it turn up again, in study after study.

---

Ps-I am sure all has noticed that ginney wop hasn’t been able to recover from every wop straw that has been squashed. All it can now do, is to gibber, as done in its last post,…or repost a redundant ‘months old’ busted wop straw.

posted 29 August 2005 07:28 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super coon:
What is "not genetically sub-Saharan" supposed to mean?

---

"...the male Somali population is a branch of the East African population [that] has approximately 15% Y chromosomes from Eurasia and approximately 5% from sub-Saharan Africa." -- Sanchez et al. 2005

quote:

---

we haven't forgotten that "females are Y chromosome carriers" in your fairy tale land.

---

Please show me where I ever made that statement. You can't because I didn't. Dishonest nigger.

quote:

---

All it can now do, is to gibber, as done in its last post,…or repost a redundant ‘months old’

---

posted 29 August 2005 01:40 PM            

quote:

---

ginney pussy:
"...the male Somali population is a branch of the East African population [that] has approximately 15% Y chromosomes from Eurasia and approximately 5% from sub-Saharan Africa." -- Sanchez et al. 2005

---

…having no bearings on…

"Although the **Horn of Africa is considered a geographic part of sub-Saharan Africa**, we have analysed the Somali population separately in order to compare the results with previously published data from other African populations." - Sanchez et al. 2005

Bedazzling, isn’t it ginney ho?

quote:

---

deranged ginney pussy:
Please show me where I ever made that statement. You can't because I didn't.

---

"female Y chromosome carriers"? Already have, amnesiac mulatto pussy! Matter of fact, you did so again, several threads ago.

quote:

---

ginney pussy:
You mean like the gibbering and reposting that constitutes your entire previous message?

---

posted 29 August 2005 02:03 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
Exactly. E3b-carrying East Africans are **not genetically** sub-Saharan African.

---

Interesting proof of the double talk of racist psuedo scientists in their attempt to distort truth!

E3b originates in Sub-Saharan Africa but because it is associated with advance civilizations these distorters refuse to call it Sub-Saharan.

E3b is Sub-Saharan and therefore it is logical to call it genetically Sub-Saharan. The attempt to separate it for the benefit of maintaining a racist idea that Sub-Saharans are backwards and incapable of being founder groups of civilization is an example of the residual affect of the Nazi occult. So the Neo-Nazis are now including not only Semites but also the Cushites as part of the spiritual elite.

Guess its an improvement to this pagan occult that is so ubiquitous.

I don't think Guido Von List would have approved at all.

posted 30 August 2005 08:20 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super coon:
"Although the **Horn of Africa is considered a geographic part of sub-Saharan Africa**, we have analysed the Somali population separately in order to compare the results with previously published data from other African populations." - Sanchez et al. 2005

---

As I explained to you before, dumb black ape, geography is not the same thing as genetics. Syrians are geographically Asian, but genetically they have nothing to do with Mongoloids. Likewise, Somalis are geographically Sub-Saharan African, but genetically (on the Y-chromosome) they have nothing to do with Negroids.

quote:

---

"female Y chromosome carriers"? Already have, amnesiac mulatto pussy! Matter of fact, you did so again, several threads ago.

---

posted 30 August 2005 02:01 PM            

quote:

---

pussy dagowop spook:

As I explained to you before, dumb black ape, geography is not the same thing as genetics. Syrians are geographically Asian, but genetically they have nothing to do with Mongoloids. Likewise, Somalis are geographically Sub-Saharan African, but genetically (on the Y-chromosome) they have nothing to do with Negroids

---

Well, there lies in the problem, kaffir ginney ho; you are too f*cked up a whore mongering spaghetti-munching cannibalistic ding mook, not at the intellectual level to know what is male or female, much less that sub-Saharan Africa is precisely “geography”, and not a “biology”. However, common sense intuits that sub-Saharan is tropical Africa, and hence, Tropical/Black Africans being the original Hg E3b carriers, are subsequently the recent forefathers of borderline Europeans. Hot fumes from the pussy of a savage spooky ginney mook, is just irrelevant jungle gibber beneath us human beings.

quote:

---

nazi-subordinate kaffir ginney wuss:
Post an exact quote where I make that statement, you lying nigger savage.

---

hysterical jungle ginney cannibal, use your paws and dig here to sort out from stench, the sewer that came from your greasy wop behind. Come on, get your moldy ginney ass rolling and get the job done, quick, filthy dago-ass toilette cleaning mook.

posted 30 August 2005 03:57 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Babbling Ape:
the study in question...

---

...has already been explained to your dumb monkey ass:

* EA1 (R1b/I) and EA2 (E3b/J2/G) = Both Caucasoid

* "Pale" and "Dark" = Recent climatic adaptations

~80% E3b + Caucasoid mtDNA = Dark Caucasoid

~80% E3b + Negroid mtDNA = Racially Hybrid

~95% R1b/I + European mtDNA = Dark Caucasoid

But thanks for confirming with your nigger spam that after six months you still have no answers for any of the maps I posted.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super coon:
“…East Africans were separated from **the rest of ** the sub-Saharan populations (Figure 2, axis 2) mainly by the different frequencies of haplogroup E3b1.” - Sanchez et al.

---

Exactly. E3b-carrying East Africans are **not genetically** sub-Saharan African.

Wow...this guys pathetic ...you guys are still arguing with this albino ape...what flip-flop....never seen an ass that made a many contradictions.. i couldn't sit down and count....got a quick question for euro eat **** ...lol
If Somalis are
~80% E3b + Negroid mtDNA = Racially Hybrid

Lets play with this fools analoge which makes completly utterly no sense ..Assume E3b is Eursasian in orgin( which isnt!!) + 15% Y chromosomes from Eurasia and approximately 5% from sub-Saharan Africa
that would make somalis 95% Eurasian...LMAO...
HOWEVER by having 5% Y chromosomes from sub-sahar- that would ofset the 95%..... because there too dark to fit ur white race purity ideology... ok..flip-flop

????if E3b was classified as eurasian that WOULD MAKE SOMALIS the puriest racial group on the planet....

this dudes a joke...him and his negroid mtdna???lol...

i've heard so much crap come out of this hybrid albino monk...froget about E3b..deal with the reality ur a BOARDERLINE EUROPEAN ...and NO EAST AFRICAN WOULD WANT TO CLAIM UR DONKEY ASS NOR DO NORDS......

hey its hilarious i havent been here for the longest yet euro keeps repeating and revisting the same crap...racial purity is non-existen..(the closest yet SEEMS to be the SOMALI POP)...and in ur case a suicidial nympho like urself needs to exit the spot and vist the nearst psych ward....

posted 31 August 2005 07:30 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super coon:
kaffir ginney ho; you are too f*cked up a whore mongering spaghetti-munching cannibalistic ding mook ... Hot fumes from the pussy of a savage spooky ginney mook

---

Is that supposed to be clever? Is it supposed to hide the fact that you're all out of arguments? Is it a reflection of your frustration and twelve-year-old mentality? What exactly are you hoping to accomplish with such juvenile idiocy? I wonder.

quote:

---

use your paws and dig here to sort out from stench

---

posted 31 August 2005 12:44 PM            

quote:

---

ginney pussy:
Is that supposed to be clever? Is it supposed to hide the fact that you're all out of arguments? Is it a reflection of your frustration and twelve-year-old mentality? What exactly are you hoping to accomplish with such juvenile idiocy? I wonder.

---

I take it that this gibber is symbolic of your incapacity to face the mounting basic questions confronting you. It's a done deal; candy ass ginzo ape reduced to a total gibbering mook. Never was “arguments”, just plain ‘ol wop-ass whopping.

quote:

---

ginney pussy:
If I had ever made such a statement, you would certainly have posted it by now. The fact that you haven't means that I didn't, and that you're a lying monkey.

---

posted 31 August 2005 01:09 PM            

Neo-Nazis are smart but transparent. Their pagan religious beliefs leave them desperate to come up with anything that supports their fledgling religious faiths. Consequently here we are arguing over E3b being Sub-Saharn or not. Don't let the occultist influenced small minded people distract you from having a good conversation. I think the threads about the Libyan Mummy and so on that give us better insight into the culture of the AEs and discussions about language origins will limit the input of the occult of the blind. At the same time, I do hope Blacks do not get caught up in the same occult like games. Example: Rastafari.

posted 06 September 2005 01:01 PM            

quote:

---

Why bother with a jabbering wop corpse, whose poor judgment leads it to conclude that this person below, according to the wop’s own words, is a “East Africans with ~80% E3b:”?…

---

LMAO: Poor judgement to say the least. This fine example of an East African is NOT East African at all. She is the chair person of an Australian Gay and Lesbian rights group. Her name happens to be Somali Cherise so when you do a google image search for "Somali" her picture comes up.

posted 06 September 2005 02:43 PM            

quote:

---

East Africans with ~80% E3b

---

posted 07 September 2005 10:50 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Serpent Wizdom:
Looks like "Evil E" is busted again!! How desparate!

---

posted 07 September 2005 11:52 AM            

quote:

---

Serpent Wizdom
Looks like "Evil E" is busted again!! How desparate!

---

We may in fact be witnessing despair. How else might we explain someone repeating a mistake for which he'd been so viciously lampooned?
Yet this facist, who fails to learn from his own mistakes, seeks solace, from the relentless refutation of all his ideas(if we may dignify them with that word), by resorting to IQ charts.

The failure to take a couple of seconds to verify that the photograph is in fact that of a Somalian illustrates another point:

quote:

---

Rasol:

Pseudoscience "research" is invariably sloppy.
Pseudoscientists clip newspaper reports, collect hearsay, cite other pseudoscience books, and pore over ancient religious or mythological works. They rarely or never make an independent investigation to check their sources.

---

posted 07 September 2005 01:48 PM            

quote:

---

How else might we explain someone repeating a mistake for which he'd been so viciously lampooned

---

Pseudoscience does not progress.

He is caught up in a vicious cycle of defeat and despair which he can't get out of.

posted 08 September 2005 06:37 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Calypso:
How else might we explain someone repeating a mistake for which he'd been so viciously lampooned?

---

A better question is how might we explain why you're all dwelling on an honest mistake that's the photographic equivalent of a typo?

Maybe because you have no answers for this plot . . .

Or for the appearance of actual Somalis . . .

posted 08 September 2005 06:43 AM            

it took Humiliated Euro 2 days this time to work up the nerve to go back to boring us with his misrepresentative irrelevant pictue spam., but he did return to the scene of the crime, out of guilt, yet having learned nothing. What an idiot.

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
Pseudoscience does not progress.

He is caught up in a vicious cycle of defeat and despair which he can't get out of.

He'll be back.....

---

posted 08 September 2005 10:35 AM            

quote:

---

Evil Euro:
A better question is how might we explain why you're all dwelling on an honest mistake that's the photographic equivalent of a typo?

Maybe because you have no answers for this plot . . .

---

I see no inconsistency with Brace's communication to Charlie and the above chart. The explanation as I see it is this: The genesis of the elongated phenotype owes nothing to admixture. It is indigenous black african.
The chart however reflects the reality that during historic times the Somali population has experienced Eurasian gene flow.

posted 08 September 2005 11:16 AM            

The chart does not relate genetics in any way, and also contradicts Erroneous Euro, but he is too stupid to see it.

Brace limited selection of so called sub-saharans, represent only one point on the map, [no Nilo-Saharans, Cushitic Groups - whom Somali are most closely related to, no W/Central Elongated types],

nonetheless his Sub-saharans cluster closely with Melanesians and Australians.

This in spite of the fact that these populations are among the most genetically distant from one another illustrates the similarity of skull-shape does not necessarily indicate recent geneflow, and the fallacy of attempting isolation of "sub-saharan morphology" to West or Central Africa.

In fact similar morphology can be found in ancient and modern East Africa, South Asia, Polynesia, Australia and elsewhere.

While Brace lumps his admittedly limited selection of Sub Saharans together as one plot point, he breaks out Europeans into specific ethnic/anthropology groups. [bogus double standard really]

Still the actual distance between some European groups is as great as the distance between Somali and Sub-saharan.

Moreover, observe item's #7 neolithic greece, and #2 NorthWest Europe...in Brace map.

Neolithic Greece in this map, is closer to Nubia than to NorthWest Europe, is intermediate between Nubia and Denmark.

Erroneous idiot is simply so obsessed with white-washing the Somali that he can't see that this map further refutes him.

To understand these charts one has to be able to think, Erroneous Euro cannot, and he targets his spams at an audience he presumes is as stupid as he is or moreso.

posted 08 September 2005 01:01 PM            

quote:

---

Rasol:
Actually the chart is not genetic. It is a cranial map comparing skull shapes with emphasis placed by Brace on nasal measurements, because that is his preference [fetish?].

The chart does not show gene flow nor does it relate genetics in any way, and also contradicts Erroneous Euro, but he is too stupid to see it.

---

Hi Rasol,

Your reply above has shed light and has advanced my knowledge of the subject, especially the information regarding Brace's emphasis on nasal measurement and your critique of the flaws in his methodology.

Allow me to clarify the point of my reply to Evil Euro:

I understand that its a cranial map. I stand corrected on the improper phraseology. You're absolutly right in pointing out that its not a question of genetic flow.
What I meant by the above, however, is that non-indigenous West Asians (e.g. Rashida)have been assimilated into Somalia in historic times. If members of this non-indigenous population or thier progeny were represented among the cranial samples it would skew the result towards the "European" cluster.

posted 08 September 2005 01:21 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Calypso:
Hi Rasol,

Your reply above has shed light and has advanced my knowledge of the subject, especially the information regarding Brace's emphasis on nasal measurement and your critique of the flaws in his methodology.

Allow me to clarify the point of my reply to Evil Euro:

I understand that its a cranial map. I stand corrected on the improper phraseology. You're absolutly right in pointing out that its not a question of genetic flow.
What I meant by the above, however, is that non-indigenous West Asians (e.g. Rashida)have been assimilated into Somalia in historic times. If members of this non-indigenous population or thier progeny were represented among the cranial samples it would skew the result

---

I have less of a problem with the 'position' of the Somali on the map than with the lack of other East African and Sahelian groups.

Any sound assessment of native African diversity will show CLINAL - continuous - variations, so that Australians, Europeans, Mongolians will all show cranial similarities to different African groups.

Brace deserves credit for at least acknowledging this limitation: I have no Sahel samples in my data base. I do not even have Ethiopians.

Further insight is provided by DR. Keita:

The background genetic variation of Europeans, Oceanians, and Asians originated in Africa and precedes in time the presence of modern humans in these areas. Europeans and Asian-Australians did develop more unique genetic profiles over time, but had a common background before their average "uniqueness" emerged. This background is African in a biohistorical sense. Therefore, it should not be surprising that some Africans share similarities with non-Africans.

The Diversity of Indigenous Africans
S.O.Y. Keita
Department of Biological Anthropology
Oxford University

posted 08 September 2005 01:33 PM            

But he has no answers for it other than evasion via obtuseness, so might as well continue on Brace, his graphs, and his methods:

PKM's Short Primer on Physical Anthropology

Brace et al.'s "own battery" of tests is based mainly on measurements of the nose. According to the same article, nasal "elevation and elongation" is influenced by adaptation to the environment.

In fact, there is little to suggest that any of the nasal measurements that make up the vast majority of the twenty-four variables used by Brace et al., are not influenced by selective forces. Since these make up the vast number of variables used, the distances, or relative similarity, shown in the Brace et al. graphs (dendograms) do not support an argument on genetic relationship.

posted 08 September 2005 01:59 PM            

quote:

---

Rasol:
Well, we've allowed the troll to change the subject from Wetton's study

---

posted 09 September 2005 06:44 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Babbling Ape:
the similarity of skull-shape does not necessarily indicate recent geneflow

---

Never said it did. But it does indicate racial similarity -- i.e. the racial similarity between East Africans and Eurasians.

quote:

---

Neolithic Greece in this map, is closer to Nubia than to NorthWest Europe, is intermediate between Nubia and Denmark.

---

Greeks are closest to the Swiss. Are the Swiss "Black" too? And the English are "intermediate" between Somalis and other Northwestern Europeans. Do you consider Englishmen "Black" as well? Dumb, distorting ape.

FACT: Somalis are closer to Europeans than they are to Sub-Saharan Africans. Period.

FACT: Nubians are intermediate between Europeans and Sub-Saharans. Period.

FACT: Neolithic Greeks are distant from both hybrid East Africans and Sub-Saharans. Period.

FACT: Ancient Egyptians and modern North Africans cluster fully with Europeans. Period.

No amount of weaseling and distorting on your part will change these plainly evident facts.

quote:

---

Well, we've allowed the troll to change the subject from Wetton's study which found that darker southern Europeans carry African male lineages while pale Northerners do not....

---

^^^^^^^^^^ World's most desperate no-answer nigger ^^^^^^^^^^

* EA1 (R1b/I) and EA2 (E3b/J2/G) = Both Caucasoid

* "Pale" and "Dark" = Recent climatic adaptations

~80% E3b + Caucasoid mtDNA = Dark Caucasoid

~80% E3b + Negroid mtDNA = Racially Hybrid

~95% R1b/I + European mtDNA = Dark Caucasoid

posted 09 September 2005 06:50 AM            

quote:

---

Greeks are closest to the Swiss. Are the Swiss "Black" too?

---

posted 09 September 2005 06:57 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
similarity skull-shape does not necessarily indicate recent geneflow

---

quote:

---

DumbEuro: Never said it did. But it does indicate racial similarity

---

Nope. CL Brace states that it does not. That you even attempt to refute Brace over his own map, without the intellect or ability to comprehend it, does indicate how foolish, desparate and pathetic you are in the face of rejection.

posted 09 September 2005 08:48 AM            

observe item's #7 neolithic greece, and #2 NorthWest Europe...in Brace map

So Greeks clusters closer to Nubians than to Northwest Europeans?

Perhaps due to admixture from Nuba? That E3b issue again?

Just a question for the more educated in this forum. Wasn't Egypt full of foreigners from Eurasia? Wouldn't a map like this be skewed with skulls of non-Egyptian people like Hebrews and so on? I am just wondering how accurate these types of maps are in telling us who the actual Egyptians were from the foreigners? Also, why is it the North Africans cluster alot closer to Europeans than Upper Egyptians? Aren't Upper Egyptians North Africans and isn't this where Egptian culture sprang from?

posted 09 September 2005 09:29 AM            

quote:

---

Wasn't Egypt full of foreigners from Eurasia? Wouldn't a map like this be skewed with skulls of non-Egyptian people like Hebrews and so on? I am just wondering how accurate these types of maps are in telling us who the actual Egyptians were from the foreigners?

---

Old and New Anthropological Studies on Pre-dynastic Upper Egypt

posted 09 September 2005 04:04 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:

Or for the appearance of actual Somalis . . .

---

LMAO So Stupid-Euro got busted for posting pics of that Australian lesbian who happened to have 'Somali' in her name!

As for a couple of the other pics, it has been pointed out before by the Somalis in here that the really "caucasian" looking man with the white hat is a Banaadir (a minority of Yemeni descent) and that other guy might have Banaadir ancestry! It seems Stupid-Euro's pics are are being singled out one-at a time. Which doesn't look good for him, since he's only got a few (selective) pictures of Somalis and not representative of what most look like!!

There are thousands of Somali pics in the web, yet stupid-Euro keeps posting the same few pictures. The idiot needs to stop using Somalis as pawns of his idiotic propaganda. I have Somali friends and I'm sure a lot of the people in this forum already know what Somalis look like so who is trying to fool?!

posted 10 September 2005 06:54 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Babbling Ape:
non sequitur. Brace skull map does not assess skin color, any more than it assesses genetics.

---

The nitpicking, no-answer nigger strikes again! Caught distorting so he tries to weasel his way out by dodging the issue.

FACT: Somalis are closer to Europeans than they are to Sub-Saharan Africans. Period.

FACT: Nubians are intermediate between Europeans and Sub-Saharans. Period.

FACT: Neolithic Greeks are distant from both hybrid East Africans and Sub-Saharans. Period.

FACT: Ancient Egyptians and modern North Africans cluster fully with Europeans. Period.

quote:

---

Originally posted by osirion:
observe item's #7 neolithic greece, and #2 NorthWest Europe...in Brace map

So Greeks clusters closer to Nubians than to Northwest Europeans?

---

Observe your illiteracy . . .

posted 10 September 2005 01:28 PM            

quote:

---

Osirion:
observe item's #7 neolithic greece, and #2 NorthWest Europe...in Brace map
So Greeks clusters closer to Nubians than to Northwest Europeans?

---

To which Evil Euro replied:

quote:

---

Observe your illiteracy . . .
Greeks are closest to the Swiss. Are the Swiss "Black" too? And the English are "intermediate" between Somalis and other Northwestern Europeans. Do you consider Englishmen "Black" as well? Dumb, distorting ape.

---

By asking these rhetorical questions in essence what Evil Euro is saying is: This graph has no internal logic and cannot be relied upon to make inferences regarding relatedness.

In fact he is complaining that Osirion, who in making his observation said nothing about Greeks being black, would use the graph, to draw conclusions regarding the relatedness of populations represented.

By his own words Evil refutes Evil. If he would honestly follow the logic of his question!

BTW he also finally admitted that Somalis are black.

[This message has been edited by Calypso (edited 10 September 2005).]

posted 10 September 2005 05:17 PM            

quote:

---

Calypso writes: By his own words Evil refutes Evil.

---

posted 10 September 2005 06:03 PM            

It has been explained to the idiotic canine why that old craniometric map is flawed, so many times!

Craniometric features are highly variable among human populations which is why the idiot's map shows Australo-melanesians have close affinities to Sub-Saharans. Does this mean close relation? NO. It is the same with Somalis and "English" no one but the idiot would believe East African Somalis to be more related to Europeans than other Sub-Saharans.

Also is the fact that Brace does not have that many samples for sub-Saharan. Other scholars have shown that both the Egyptian and Somalis skulls group closer to people in Kenya and Tanzania who in turn group closer to other Sub-Saharans. There is no clear distinction!

posted 10 September 2005 06:29 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
This is tiresome!

---

posted 10 September 2005 06:49 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super car:
. This is precisely what drives the ginzo crackpot; hoping to wear out intelligent folks by reverting to mindless jibber that have been brutally discredited time and again. As strange as it may be, the wop hopes to use this, among other infant antics, as relief from deep frustration of not being able to win any debate with reason.

---

I guess so! but what do you expect from an imbecilic canine!!

posted 11 September 2005 07:03 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Calypso:
This graph has no internal logic and cannot be relied upon to make inferences regarding relatedness.

---

You have no internal logic. Greeks or Englishmen being slightly dissimilar to an arbitrarily selected European group, and Somalis being totally dissimilar to all sub-Saharan Africans, are two entirely different inferences with widely different implications. The fact that you're too stupid to correctly interpret data doesn't make that data worthless. It just make you worthless.

quote:

---

BTW he also finally admitted that Somalis are black.

---

posted 11 September 2005 11:02 AM            

quote:

---

Evil Euro:
You have no internal logic. Greeks or Englishmen being slightly dissimilar to an arbitrarily selected European group, and Somalis being totally dissimilar to all sub-Saharan Africans, are two entirely different inferences with widely different implications. The fact that you're too stupid to correctly interpret data doesn't make that data worthless. It just make you worthless.

---

Evil Euro, you gotta be kidding me. You laid down the criteria for interpreting this graph (distance = divergence; proximity = convergence). You've claimed that the placement of Somalis midway between the "sub-saharan" and the "European" cluster is proof of the Somali's "intermediate" racial status. Following that reasoning: the placement of the English midway between the NorthWest Europeans and the Somalis is evidence of a rather marked "negroid" character of Anglo Saxons (recall that you've often lamented the miscegenation that occured between pristine Caucasian East Africans of old and the encroaching Bantus making Somalis mulattoes and the British from the looks of this map - Quadroons). The Somali-Subsaharan distance is about the same as that between Greeks and Iranians (the name of the latter btw stems from the word Aryan). We can, therefore, using your reasoning, infer a very divergent racial charater between the two groups.
Either you follow your own logic, where ever it leads, Evil Euro, or you accept the fact that this graph is fundamentally flawed. The abundance of European representation (Europe being such a tiny peninsula) versus the paucity of African representation should lead a reasonable person to question the soundness of the graph.
In pursuit of your ultra racist, Nazi, agenda Herr/Fraulein (no gender based insult intended - just covering both possibilities - the political slur is intended) Evil Euro this graph does not help you. Zeig Heil!!!

[This message has been edited by Calypso (edited 11 September 2005).]

posted 11 September 2005 01:34 PM            

quote:

---

EvilE wrote:
You have no internal logic. Greeks or Englishmen being slightly dissimilar to an arbitrarily selected European group, and Somalis being totally dissimilar to all sub-Saharan Africans, are two entirely different inferences with widely different implications. The fact that you're too stupid to correctly interpret data doesn't make that data worthless. It just make you worthless.

---

No, the map clearly indicates, based on your logic, that Greeks are intermediates between Nubians and Northwest Europeans.

[This message has been edited by osirion (edited 11 September 2005).]

posted 12 September 2005 06:36 AM            

1) There's a difference between the vertical axis and the horizontal axis of any plot.

2) When judging the implications of "intermediacy", the absolute distance between groups has to be taken into account.

3) Brace himself -- the author of the plot -- explains that it's East Africans who group toward Eurasians, and not the other way around:

posted 13 September 2005 10:03 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
To the two clueless morons:

1) There's a difference between the vertical axis and the horizontal axis of any plot.

2) When judging the implications of "intermediacy", the absolute distance between groups has to be taken into account.

3) Brace himself -- the author of the plot -- explains that it's East Africans who group toward Eurasians, and not the other way around:

"As our data show, the people of the Horn of Africa are craniofacially less distinct from a spectrum of samples marginally including South Asia and running all the way from the Middle East to northwest Europe than they are to any group in sub-Saharan Africa." (Brace et al., 1993, p. 19)

---

Thats a load of CRAP. Sub-saharans are the extreme of the Black cluster and Iranians are the extreme of the Caucasian cluster. Both Swiss and Greeks plot far closer to Nubians (which have the average Negroid features being in the mean positions) than they do to Iranians. Based on your logic it holds that Greeks and Swiss are closer in facial features to Nubians than they are to Iranians (the Mesopatamians).

That is your logic not mine you dumb Negro hybrid WOP. I am sure Jews are a lot closer to Iranians than you Greek mulattos. Wanna be aryan loser.

posted 15 September 2005 06:53 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by osirion:
Thats a load of CRAP. Sub-saharans are the extreme of the Black cluster and Iranians are the extreme of the Caucasian cluster. Both Swiss and Greeks plot far closer to Nubians (which have the average Negroid features being in the mean positions) than they do to Iranians. Based on your logic it holds that Greeks and Swiss are closer in facial features to Nubians than they are to Iranians (the Mesopatamians).

---

Incorrect. Greeks and Swiss are on the right side of the plot with all other Europeans and Caucasoids. Sub-Saharan Africans (western, central and southern clustered around a single point) are on the left side of the plot. Nubians are in the middle, reflecting their hybrid Caucasoid-Negroid ancestry. You're visually illiterate. You need to learn how to interpret multidimensional scaling plots.

quote:

---

That is your logic not mine you dumb Negro hybrid WOP. I am sure Jews are a lot closer to Iranians than you Greek mulattos. Wanna be aryan loser.

---

posted 23 September 2005 02:13 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
Ea6:

---

posted 23 September 2005 06:41 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Salpierre:
Prince Bandar's mother was Sudanese, born to a black slave family

---

posted 24 September 2005 07:02 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Babbling Ape:
Completely Irrelevant.

---

It's extremely relevant because you used him as an example of a native Middle Easterner, when in reality he's just a Negro slave like you.

posted 24 September 2005 10:09 AM            

quote:

---

DumbEuro writes; It's extremely relevant because you used him as an example of a native Middle Easterner

---

Idiot.

Prince Bandar IS native to the middle East born in Saudi Arabia, but that is also completely irrelevant to Wetton's study,[which you still don't understand] which is not based on ethnic lineage but rather appearance.

The pictures were presented to illustrate overlap in Wetton's EA [ethnic appearance] catagories on populations residing in Britain, and the futility of your idiotic fantasies about 'fully caucasoid'.

You completely missed the point, as usual....

quote:

---

In the context of the study in question (EA stands for Ethnic Appearance Group):

Ea2:

Ea3:

Ea6:

Born in Taif, Saudi Arabia, Prince Bandar is a son of Crown Prince Sultan bin Abdul Aziz, the Deputy Prime Minister of Saudi Arabia.

Define 'fully' caucazoid?

---

quote:

---

Crybaby Euro whines: I suppose it was an honest mistake

---

quote:

---

Groveling Euro writes: but how ironic that it occurred in the same thread in which I was viciously attacked for my equally honest mistake.

---

boooo hoooo! lol.

Listen carefully:

You are rightly ridiculed **by everyone** because you are a chronic liar and a complete idiot who loves to make a fool of himself and has just done so...again.

Now, you can add crybaby to the list as well.

But crying won't help you, you pathetic racist pansy.

This thread is on page 6 and you still have no idea of what Wetton's study is about.

Since you can't analyzse the study, maybe you should go have your head examined.

We've only begun beating you down.....