posted 31 August 2005 01:11 PM            

"As I see it, the appearances of the Upper Nile Valley and Horn people has little if anything to do with admixtures and much the result of in situ circumstances. The elongation of the nose is clearly a climate-induced phenomenon and takes a long time to manifest itself. The same thing is true for the reduction in tooth size which markedly distinguishes those people form the Niger-Congo people. One has to suggest that Vavilov's identification of that as one of the early areas of crop domestication would have meant that food preparation techniques reducing the
pressures for mastication had been operating there for a long time, and tooth
size reduction in situ would be one of the expected consequences.

Hope this helps,

C. L. Brace

posted 31 August 2005 01:33 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super car:
I hope this information is available in your yahoo site.

---

I will post in the yahoo group. I'm still in the process of exchanging emails with Dr. Brace. I hope this dialogue will help me clarify and erase any misgivings I might have had about him. The main thing here is that Erroneous E cannot post Dr. Brace's graph as proof that Somalis show 'Eurasian' influence craniometrically because Dr. Brace does *NOT* believe Horn of Africans acquired their looks from mixture with Eurasians. That gives Erroneous E one less graph to spam.

posted 31 August 2005 01:49 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Horemheb:
It might mean that if you were telling the truth.

---

posted 31 August 2005 02:10 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Charlie_Bass:
What??? I am telling the truth, I have *NEVER' misrepresnted the email dialogue I've had with geneticists and anthropologists. C. Loring Brace simply stated the same thing I quoted of him from Ashley Montagu's book that contained his essay. Get your head out of the sand and accept it.

---

posted 31 August 2005 02:25 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Horemheb:
He is showing us an e-mail where the man is contradicting his own study....suprised we might be a little suspicious.

---

posted 31 August 2005 02:33 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Horemheb:
He is showing us an e-mail where the man is contradicting his own study....suprised we might be a little suspicious.

---

How is he contradicting himself you idiot? He *NEVER* stated Horn of Africans acquired their traits through mixture, I even posted his words directly from a book he contributed to with Ashley Montagu. Take your Eurocentrism and stick it.

posted 31 August 2005 02:50 PM            

"Now I am in the realm of complete guesswork. I have no Sahel samples
in my data base. I do not even have Ethiopians. I had hoped to measure the
Ethiopian collection at the Musee de l'Homme when I was in Europe for the
CAES meetings in Florence just over 2 years ago, but my brother, who had been my Parisian pied a terre for nearly 45 years, died before I got there. Just as a matter of guesswork, I would expect people like the Fulani to fall into the same general category as the Somali and Nubians in a kind of Northeast African group. Hiernaux's Elongated East Africans is a fine observation by a first-rate student of the business."

And Erroneous E still believes Hiernaux was wrong. C. Loring Brace, the man who's studies have been spammed by Erroneous E and misrepresented even agrees with Hiernaux as well as Keita.

posted 31 August 2005 02:54 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Charlie_Bass:
In response to my question about where Ethiopians, Nubians and Somalis cluster, Dr. Brace said this:

"Now I am in the realm of complete guesswork. I have no Sahel samples
in my data base. I do not even have Ethiopians. I had hoped to measure the
Ethiopian collection at the Musee de l'Homme when I was in Europe for the
CAES meetings in Florence just over 2 years ago, but my brother, who had been my Parisian pied a terre for nearly 45 years, died before I got there. Just as a matter of guesswork, I would expect people like the Fulani to fall into the same general category as the Somali and Nubians in a kind of Northeast African group. Hiernaux's Elongated East Africans is a fine observation by a first-rate student of the business."

And Erroneous E still believes Hiernaux was wrong. C. Loring Brace, the man who's studies have been spammed by Erroneous E and misrepresented even agrees with Hiernaux as well as Keita.

---

posted 31 August 2005 03:04 PM            

Surpised you even bothered responding to clown Horemheb who has never read CL Brace and wouldn't understand a word of it even if he had. lol.

Modern anthropology has really left Dienekes and fanboy for dead.

It's laughable to watch them scrounge pathetically for misrepresented outdated half quotes from the Coonian Neanderthal era of bone-science, and then spam them for all they're worth...which is nothing.

Meanwhile modern scholarship evades these fools like day old stink, because they know they will be horribly misquoted. Leaving Dienekes and fanboy to stew in their bitterness and whine about being 'ignored'.

posted 31 August 2005 03:07 PM            

The email is authenic. Mr. Charlie Bass forwarded the email to me. Brace even mentions that the whole ''caucasoid'' eastern African hypothesis came from Carl Selgiman.

How about also emailing Dr. Howells about his database if you can.

I did not get the email about the Fulani or Ethiopians from Brace though. Could you also email me that responce,Charlie?

posted 31 August 2005 03:16 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by ausar:

The email is authenic. Mr. Charlie Bass forwarded the email to me. Brace even mentions that the whole ''caucasoid'' eastern African hypothesis came from Carl Selgiman.

How about also emailing Dr. Howells about his database if you can.

I did not get the email about the Fulani or Ethiopians from Brace though. Could you also email me that responce,Charlie?

---

I just forwarded the email to you. The more i think about it, Keita and Brace really do *NOT* differ that much in what they say, the only difference is the terminology they apply.

posted 31 August 2005 03:21 PM            

People should always consult the anthropologist in question. Don't depend on second hand sources or from interpretations of laymen anthropologists.

posted 31 August 2005 04:04 PM            

quote:

---

rasol:
Surpised you even bothered responding to clown Horemheb who has never read CL Brace and wouldn't understand a word of it even if he had. lol.

---

If illiterate ginney ho is responded to, **this would of course be the only place where ginney ever gets any sort of attention**, I don't see why Hore shouldn't afforded one! The only difference is that former presents studies that it doesn't comprehend, while hoping to deceive none other but thyself, and the latter safely stays away from presenting any material he doesn't understand. I would say the latter is somewhat smarter of the two.

quote:

---

Originally posted by ausar:

Thanks,Charlie. I just recieved the email conversation between you and Brace in the email box.

People should always consult the anthropologist in question. Don't depend on second hand sources or from interpretations of laymen anthropologists.

---

posted 31 August 2005 04:22 PM            

quote:

---

rasol:
Surpised you even bothered responding to clown Horemheb who has never read CL Brace and wouldn't understand a word of it even if he had. lol.

---

quote:

---

If illiterate ginney ho is responded to, **this would of course be the only place where ginney ever gets any sort of attention**, I don't see why Hore shouldn't afforded one! The only difference is that former presents studies that it doesn't comprehend, while hoping to deceive none other but thyself, and the latter safely stays away from presenting any material he doesn't understand. I would say the latter is somewhat smarter of the two.

---

posted 01 September 2005 07:55 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Charlie_Bass:
I recently e-mailed Dr. Brace about the biological affinities of East Africans, particularly peoples of the Upper Nile and Horn and this is his reply. I will forward the e-mail to Ausar to authenticate it. Here is is reply:

"As I see it, the appearances of the Upper Nile Valley and Horn people has little if anything to do with admixtures and much the result of in situ circumstances. The elongation of the nose is clearly a climate-induced phenomenon and takes a long time to manifest itself. The same thing is true for the reduction in tooth size which markedly distinguishes those people form the Niger-Congo people. One has to suggest that Vavilov's identification of that as one of the early areas of crop domestication would have meant that food preparation techniques reducing the
pressures for mastication had been operating there for a long time, and tooth
size reduction in situ would be one of the expected consequences.

Hope this helps,

C. L. Brace

Erroneous E, what are your answes to this?

---

posted 01 September 2005 09:42 AM            

quote:

---

the appearances of the Upper Nile Valley and Horn people has little if anything to do with admixtures.

I would expect people like the Fulani to fall into the same general category as the Somali and Nubians . Hiernaux's Elongated East Africans is a fine observation by a first-rate student of the business.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EvilOdor:
what that illustrates.....

---

...is that you're a cornered coward, caught in a lie. Your pathetic practise of distorting information has grown old and gone sour.

Face it EuroStench. You've told too many lies for far too long. It's all fallen apart.

quote:

---

Cobra writes:

Euro Trash you're just pathtic....look at you.

---

Better wipe your face, bleeding Euro. You look busted.

posted 01 September 2005 10:16 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
Self-defeating moron, what that illustrates is that indigenous East Africans are of a different racial type than "Niger-Congo" peoples from other parts of Africa

---

Brace never called them a different racial type you moron and Brace's 'Niger-Congo' cluster does *NOT* include Sahelians. So what racial type are Somalis you moron? Brace certainly agrees with Hiernaux about the 'Elongated East African' classification, he rejects the hybrid label you gave them. Don't distract away from this point.

quote:

---

That's what Tishkoff et al. confirmed genetically.

---

no you lying disgusting idiot, you purposely misrepresented Tischkoff et tal's study to mean that Somalis are racially mixed hybrids, which she does *NOT* imply. She simply said that Somalis are intermediate genetically based on the fact that non-Africans contain a subste of the diversity found in East Africans, like the Somalis for example. This was explained to you so may damn times. if you like, I'll email Tischkoff et tal and get her words verbatim what she means, I don't need to rely on pseudo-thinkers such as yourself and Dienekes. You and Dienekes have maintained that Somalis have Eurasian or caucasoid traits acquired via mixture and you even misrepresented Brace's views by posting his graph as evidence. he shares neither your views nor Dienekes' views.

posted 01 September 2005 10:31 AM            

quote:

---

I'll email Tischkoff et tal and get her words verbatim what she means,

---

Lol. His misrpresentations of Brace directly refuted, by Brace himself, he tries to distract with old distortions of Tishkoff.

quote:

---

Brace shares neither your views nor Dienekes' views.

---

posted 01 September 2005 11:55 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
Self-defeating moron, what that illustrates is that indigenous East Africans are of a different racial type than "Niger-Congo" peoples from other parts of Africa, more closely resembling non-Africans than they do Negroids. That's what Howells' analysis determined. That's what Brace's craniometric map shows. That's what Tishkoff et al. confirmed genetically. That's what we see in the phenotypes of Somalis. That's what I and Dienekes have been saying for months, nay, years, and you've been denying. And now you've gone and provided even further evidence, but are too f*cking clueless to realize it.

---

You have been babbling about admixture for months.

Why don't you shutup until you have something useful to say.

posted 01 September 2005 12:50 PM            

quote:

---

rasol:
...is that you're a cornered coward, caught in a lie. Your pathetic practise of distorting information has grown old and gone sour.

---

posted 02 September 2005 07:25 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Charlie_Bass:
Brace certainly agrees with Hiernaux about the 'Elongated East African' classification, he rejects the hybrid label you gave them.

---

No. What's been rejected is the idea that "elongated" types are the result of indigenous Negroids mixing with intrusive Caucasoids from the Mediterranean. What hasn't been rejected -- and what all of the evidence points to -- is that they're the result of indigenous Eurasian-like East Africans mixing with intrusive Niger-Congo peoples from other parts of Africa.

But understand that whatever the explanation, the "hybrid label" cannot be "rejected" because...well...East Africans are hybrid:

quote:

---

You and Dienekes have maintained that Somalis have Eurasian or caucasoid traits acquired via mixture

---

Again, no. See what I just wrote above to know what I "maintain".

And Dienekes has already expressed essentially the same thing:

=============================
The hybrid nature of east Africans is not established by their "elongation". As you correctly point out, "elongation" is adaptive, and hence can be reasonably thought to be native in the ecological zone of eastern Africa (*)

The old physical anthropologists correctly discerned the hybrid nature of the East Africans, who have an intermediate position between the Caucasoid and Negroid races. What they failed to realize is that this hybrid nature was not the result of intruding Caucasoids (**), but rather the opposite, the result of intruding Negroids into the territory of native east Africans.

In other words, in old times, the West Asians (Caucasoids) originated from East Africans of old times, and were naturally similar to them, given the relative closeness of their physical environments, and their genetic relationship. As time went by, the West Asians and their descendants in Europe and Central Asia evolved into the classical Caucasoid types that we know today, while the east Africans retained the environmentally adapted ancestral form. However, the east Africans lived in Africa, and thus experienced gene flow from other African populations, especially those who evolved in a different environment, such as the Negroids, or those archaic Africans who derived from the older branches of the human family tree, and who were naturally much different somatically.

Hence, today east Africans are placed between Caucasoids and Negroids because (a) the Caucasoids have evolved their own specialized characters beyond the ancestral form of their east African ancestors, and (b) the east Africans have undergone a degree of admixture with other Africans, changing their physical appearance.

(*) Which includes, it must be said, parts of western Asia, as well, but does not include most of Africa.
(**) Although some east African populations do have substantial Caucasoid input as well.
=============================

posted 02 September 2005 08:19 AM            

quote:

---

No. What's been rejected is the idea that "elongated" types are the result of indigenous Negroids mixing with intrusive Caucasoids from the Mediterranean.

---

Thats exactly what I've been saying all along but the information on your website says otherwise. It was *YOU* and your cohort Dienekes that has been saying that East Africans acquired their looks through mixture, the preponderance of evidence is against that.

quote:

---

What hasn't been rejected -- and what all of the evidence points to -- is that they're the result of indigenous Eurasian-like East Africans

---

There were no 'Eurasian-like' indigenous East Africans, period, I don't care for your laymen terminology or what you have shortened for your convenience. The 'prehistoric ones resemble the modern ones, just as Hiernaux, Brace, and even your idol Coon observed.

"There is every reason to believe that they are ancestral to the living 'Elongated East Africans'. Neither of these populations, fossil and modern, should be considered to be closely related to Caucasoids of Europe and western Asia, as they usually are in lierature." (Hiernaux, 1975)

quote:

---

But understand that whatever the explanation, the "hybrid label" cannot be "rejected" because...well...East Africans are hybrid

---

they are not hybrid and why do you use Dr. Brace's map and purposely misrepresent his study to support your agenda? Dr. Brace clearly states that Somalis, Horn of Africans and Upper Nile valley peoples acquired their traits through adaptation, not hybridisation with anyone. I got the words straight from Dr. Brace himself and well as from literature he wrote. Keep relying on your laymen's interpretation like the moron you are.

Eurotroll parroted:

quote:

---

What they failed to realize is that this hybrid nature was not the result of intruding Caucasoids (**), but rather the opposite, the result of intruding Negroids into the territory of native east Africans

---

The evidence on the Y-chromosone alone refutes the notion of extensive mixing of 'intruding Negroids' with native East Africans. Unless you and Dienekes can prove that intruding 'Negroid' females only but no males invaded East Africa and mixed with indigenous East Africans you have no argument.

posted 02 September 2005 08:44 AM            

quote:

---

And Dienekes has already expressed essentially the same thing:

---

posted 02 September 2005 08:56 AM            

quote:

---

Euroloser whines..... What's been rejected is the idea that "elongated" types are the result of indigenous Negroids mixing with intrusive Caucasoids from the Mediterranean.

---

quote:

---

Charlie Bass writes: Thats exactly what I've been saying all along.

---

In fact, it is exactly as Hiernaux has stated all along, mooting the entire pseudo-argument.

Will re-post Hiernaux's correct observations as aknowledged by Brace, but of greater interest was the classic freudian slip from Euromonkey: what's been rejected is.....followed by a cowardly attempt to run away from the reality of being rejected by his own sources.

Classic example of denial in the face of rejection.

posted 02 September 2005 09:09 AM            

the appearances of Horn of Africa people has little if anything to do with admixtures. - CL Brace.

East Africans have been [Black] for 10's of thousands of years. CL Brace.

Denial of rejection is mere gay-loser self humiliation.

The oldest remains of Homo sapiens sapiens found in East Africa [resemble] several living populations of East Africa, who are very dark skinned and differ greatly from Europeans in a number of body proportions. There is every reason to believe that they are ancestral to the living 'Elongated East Africans'. They should not be considered closely related to Europeans. -

[Jean Hiernaux], "The People of Africa"

There is however evidence of.... intrusion of Black East Africans into Southern Europe, whose heterogeneous descendants carry their lineages to this day.

This should be of some solice, to RejectedEuro.

posted 02 September 2005 10:17 AM            

"No L3b or L3e lineages that are widely spread in West African populations and Bantu-speaking southeastern Africans (Salas et al. 2002; Rosa et al. 2004) were found in Ethiopians."

"Taken together, lineages of haplogroups L0-L5 and their subclades reveal high regional specificity in Africa, with haplotypes observed in Ethiopians being, by and large, different from those spread in southeastern Africain particular, those in Mozambique. The pattern of shared deeply rooting lineages that are distant in their inner branches is analogous to that observed for Y-chromosomal phylogenies (Semino et al. 2002)."

Am. J. Hum. Genet., 75:752-770, 2004

Just to recap:

posted 02 September 2005 10:37 AM            

There are more West African specific lineages in Oman than Ethiopia.

What East and West Africans share is PN2 lineages [E3a/E3b] also of East African origin, as well as L lineages that spread to East and West Africa BEFORE the Pn2 transition.

What non-Africans share is L3 derived lineages.

Derived L3 lineages are shared by - Andaman Islanders, New Guineans, Australians, Chinese and Swedes...., all non Africans, and the Andamans have the oldest [ie - ORIGINAL] out of Africa L3 lineages.

So L3 doesn't help Dienekes invent a fantasy ancient caucaZoid population.

White people are just...what they are:

a group of Paleolithic hunter gatherer migrants from central Asia who isolated themselves in Europes Ice Age refuges, and lost their skin color during the Mesolithic.

The Southern Europeans were then remixed with advanced Neolithic agriculturalists of SouthWest Asian and East African origin. Southern Europeans carry their genes to this day. Most have accepted this, but some cannot. Too bad.

posted 02 September 2005 12:30 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

In fact, it is exactly as Hiernaux has stated all along, mooting the entire pseudo-argument.

Will re-post Hiernaux's correct observations as aknowledged by Brace, but of greater interest was the classic freudian slip from Euromonkey: what's been rejected is.....followed by a cowardly attempt to run away from the reality of being rejected by his own sources.

Classic example of denial in the face of rejection.

---

posted 02 September 2005 12:44 PM            

quote:

---

ginney pussy:
And Dienekes has already expressed essentially the same thing:

=============================
What they failed to realize is that this hybrid nature was not the result of intruding Caucasoids (**), but rather the opposite, the result of intruding Negroids into the territory of native east Africans.

---

What I pointed earlier elsewhere, was on point about the mentality of these intellectually and emotionally challenged crackpots, which was this...

"Nothing new; the Dienekes fanboy thinks he knows who is dealing with. His games are all too well known. The Passarino study, as outdated and pseudo-scientific as it is (e.g., long outdated racial constructs), doesn't even begin to help Dieneke's pet, where E3b lineages are concerned. The study doesn't in any way suggest E3b not being indigenous, much less non sub-Saharan African. **In fact, it implies that the so-called "caucasoid" lineages are foreign to the region. So one can see how damaging this should actually be for Dieneke's pet, in that his [Dieneke's pet] premises is that these folks were supposed to **orginally** be "caucasoids".** And even if we suppose that the African Horn populations are hybrids, as he likes to fantasize, this would still do nothing to lessen the fact that E3b is of sub-Sahara tropical African origin, NOT foreign to Africans. So, no matter which way the worm wiggles, the fact that E3b lineages are sub-Sahara tropical African, still holds true, and so is the fact that outlier Europeans like Greeks, carry these sub-Saharan lineages in significant frequencies!

Originally posted here: http://phpbb-host.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=342&start=0&mforum=thenile

Ps---Now of course, this isn't indicative of these crackpots' only position. They in fact flip flop back and forth from implying that these East Africans are hybrids because of genetic admixture from "intruding caucasoids" [as exemplified by their usage of the Passarino study for this purpose], to the contradictory idea of East Africans being originally "caucasoids" [by baselessly trying to affiliate tropical sub-Saharan E3b markers with "caucasoids"], depending on the moment of which pseudo-scientific ideology is being trashed into the gutter, where it belongs!

posted 03 September 2005 07:35 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Charlie_Bass:
There were no 'Eurasian-like' indigenous East Africans

---

Well, if you don't like either explanation, then the onus is on you to provide an alternative theory to account for Brace's plot. If Somalis are neither mixed with Eurasians nor descended from Eurasian-like East Africans, then how do you explain their cranial alignment near Eurasian groups?

quote:

---

Dr. Brace clearly states that Somalis, Horn of Africans and Upper Nile valley peoples acquired their traits through adaptation, not hybridisation with anyone.

---

And I fully agree with him. The Eurasian-like "elongated" morphology is indigenous to East Africa. But it isn't the only racial element present in modern East Africans.

quote:

---

Unless you and Dienekes can prove that intruding 'Negroid' females only but no males invaded East Africa

---

That has already been proven:

posted 03 September 2005 07:44 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Distorting Ape:
East Africans have been [Black] for 10's of thousands of years. CL Brace.

---

Of course, the actual quote says "equatorial" and not "Black". Elongated morphology is indeed equatorial, but not the same kind of Holocene rainforest equatorial that produced Negroids. Rather, the kind of Pleistocene desert equatorial that produced proto-Caucasoids. Hence the alignment of Somalis near Eurasians.

quote:

---

There is however evidence of.... intrusion of Black East Africans into Southern Europe

---

Of course, that link provides no such evidence. This desperate need to be associated with Europeans only exposes the Negro's keen awareness of his own inferiority, and deep shame about his underachievement. In other words, it's doing you more harm than good, savage. Take my advice and quit now before every last shred of your dignity is gone.

On the Y-chromosome Greeks, Italians and Spaniards cluster with Brits, Germans and Czechs:

quote:

---

---

Better to be an intelligent "parrot" of the truth than a dumb ape with no answers.

posted 03 September 2005 09:54 AM            

EuroMonkey continues to screech in protest of his total rejection by CL Brace....

quote:

---

Elongated morphology is indeed "equatorial"

---

Unfortunately, you have once again completely missed the point.

The actual quote refers specifically to equatorial, black skin color.

Clines and Clusters versus “race”:
C. Loring Brace et al
Page 149, on black skin color of Sudanese and Horn Africans....

“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 the East Horn of Africa have been equatorial [Black skinned] for many tens of thousands of years.”

Since you are dumb and desparate to pretend not to understand, Brace makes this observation again, later....
The East Africans in question include some of the blackest [Equatorical in skin color] people in the world

But you keep playing deaf and dumb..all rejected losers do that, and that is all you are.

Too bad you can't also play the 'mute' and cease your foolish monkey screechings which grow more pathetic with each post.

posted 03 September 2005 10:16 AM            

quote:

---

Bird-brained Euro writes: Better to be an intelligent "parrot".

---

Oh, you are a parrot, of that you can be assured. As for the rest....parroting is by definition bird-brained behavior, making "intelligent parrot" an oxymoron, and you...a moron, plain and simple.

As for Dienekes himself, he is a mere COWARD.

You are parroting a non scholar, and cheap propagandist for mentally challenged gay albino monkeys like yourself. Dienekes relies on your stupidity, otherwise you'd notice he constantly contradicts himself, leaving you out on a limb to hang, like the monkey you are:

quote:

---

Thought Quotes Dienekes:

Earliest examples of the four major racial types

"The earliest known Negroids date from the ~14,500-12,500BP site of Jebel Sahaba in Lower Nubia."

Thought Writes:

The Jebel Sahaba remains posit "Negroids" in Egypt (Lower Nubia) prior to the spread of E3b out of Africa.

---

How long before he contradicts himself again, and goes back to his 'recent West African origin' nonsense?

I'd say, as soon as he realizes he just further validated [yet again], Larry Angel's findings of 'Negroid from Nubia' remains in Neolithic Greece.

The whole point of his ludicrous 'West African origin' was to deny that his fellow Greeks carry male lienages from Black Africans - which of course they do, and obviously HE KNOWS.

Dienekes runs away from debates, because like all cowards...he anticipates losing.

On the zoo of a website he 'moderates', he was reduced to banning Charlie Bass and Thought after accusing them of 'hurting his feelings', because they had the audacity to point out his contradictions. Fortunately for Dienekes you are too stupid to even see them.

Meanwhile Brace and Hiernaux have have once again exposed fraud Dienekes, and rejected fanboy EuroLoser. So all you two have left is each other. How sweet.

Keep sucking Dienekes, loser.

posted 03 September 2005 01:40 PM            

quote:

---

ginney pussy:
And I fully agree with him. The Eurasian-like "elongated" morphology is indigenous to East Africa. But it isn't the only racial element present in modern East Africans.

---

If you are now forced to agree, then what does that make your “Eurasian-like” reference?...exactly, stupid & immaterial.

quote:

---

ginney pussy:
"This suggests that male-mediated gene flow from Niger-Congo speakers to the Ethiopian population was probably very limited ... Caucasoid gene flow into the Ethiopian gene pool occurred predominantly through males. Conversely, the Niger-Congo contribution to the Ethiopian population occurred mainly through females." (Passarino et al. 1998)

---

Outdated [as Sanchez, Salas et al demonstrate] studies you don’t understand, is too dangerous for a wop. This wop mystification has manifested itself through the no-show answers to:

• 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?

posted 04 September 2005 07:35 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Babbling Ape:
Unfortunately, you have once again completely missed the point. The actual quote refers specifically to equatorial, black skin color.

---

And you have once again completely dodged the issue. We're talking about craniofacial morphology, you desperate, kitchen-sink nigger, not skin color. Stop trying to change the subject with irrelevant quotes to cover your lack of answers:

Well, if you don't like either explanation, then the onus is on you to provide an alternative theory to account for Brace's plot. If Somalis are neither mixed with Eurasians nor descended from Eurasian-like East Africans, then how do you explain their cranial alignment near Eurasian groups?

quote:

---

The Jebel Sahaba remains posit "Negroids" in Egypt (Lower Nubia) prior to the spread of E3b out of Africa.

---

Not prior. At the same time, and possibly two thousand years later. A single specimen in that time frame doesn't help your "case" much.

quote:

---

"intelligent parrot" an oxymoron

---

Parrots are extremely smart creatures. The only oxymoron in our particular situation is "intelligent negro":

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super coon:
What haplotypes are considered “Niger Congo” mtDNA in the Ethiopian gene pool?

---

Read Passarino's study for the specifics, lazy ape. Here are his plots showing Ethiopians closer to Niger-Congo groups maternally (A) than paternally (B):

posted 04 September 2005 09:50 AM            

quote:

---

And you have once again completely dodged the issue. We're talking about craniofacial morphology

---

Nice try loser, but you were attempting to refute Brace's comments on the Equatorial skin color of East Africans, by pretending he wasn't referring to skin color. Idiot.

The fact that you completely misunderstood Brace' quote indicates that you either -

had no idea of what Brace was talking about;

are too stupid to comprehend it.

Or both.

It's just another EuroMonkey screw-up on your part. You should have learned by now that your monkey antics will always be exposed as such on this forum.

quote:

---

EuroMonkey defends his bird brain: Parrots are extremely smart creatures

---

They're stupid. However if they know the difference between skin color and skeletal morphology, and if they can further discern the diference between skeletal and craniofacial morphology then they're perhaps not as stupid as you are.

Hmm, perhaps you should have a translate CL Brace for you. It can't possibly suck at it, any worse than you do....

posted 04 September 2005 12:33 PM            

You guys have burned stupid-euro's ass to ashes!!!

posted 04 September 2005 12:45 PM            

Meaningless test case:
The fact is that people in USA would rather vote for a white C student liek the presedent than the higher scoring Oriental who exceeds the intellectual prowess profiled by Euro. That's a fact!!

posted 04 September 2005 12:56 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by yazid904:
I am amused that Euro would add the intelligence scores of ethnic groups as if they were indicative of some greater mind power. intelligence tests only show the level and degree of socialization/education within the society. If one has no access to education, or laws passed to prevent access to education in the social sphere, then the tests will show that, as it does.

Meaningless test case:
The fact is that people in USA would rather vote for a white C student liek the presedent than the higher scoring Oriental who exceeds the intellectual prowess profiled by Euro. That's a fact!!

---

LMAO Yazid, you know very well that Stupid-Euro just got pissed that he is being roasted so merely attacks with futile remarks on "racial IQ".

It not surprising an idiot like him would resort to such tactics. He could either accept the facts or attack them. We know he couldn't accept them and since he couldn't attack them either, the coward has to revert back to his racist slandering!

Sorry stupid, but you racist dreams are going up in flames!!

posted 04 September 2005 02:34 PM            

quote:

---

I am amused that Euro would add the intelligence scores of ethnic groups as if they were indicative of some greater mind power.

---

Not only that, but he did this in a reply in which he began by complaining of changing the subject, which he then again proceeded to attempt to do. In fact, since he has no answer for C.L. Brace or Jean Hiernaux's devastating rebuke of fraud Dienekes, he needs to change the subject.

I'm glad everyone has caught on to Euroneous Euro's silly and ineffective methods.

posted 04 September 2005 03:15 PM            

quote:

---

ginney pussy:
Read Passarino's study for the specifics, lazy ape. Here are his plots showing Ethiopians closer to Niger-Congo groups maternally (A) than paternally (B):

---

Hey, bastard milksop of a ginzo ape, you do realize the immateriality of this map, right? So I reiterate the questions that were provided in what we call "english":

• What "haplotypes" [not a map] are considered “Niger Congo” mtDNA in the Ethiopian gene pool?

• Where is the Borana sample that Passarino studied, and what "Niger Congo" mtDNA are the supposed to carry?
  

posted 04 September 2005 03:41 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
Parrots are extremely smart creatures

---

par·rot ( P ) Pronunciation Key (prt)
n.
Any of numerous tropical and semitropical birds of the order Psittaciformes, characterized by a short hooked bill, brightly colored plumage, and, in some species, the ability to mimic human speech or other sounds.

One who imitates the words or actions of another, especially without understanding them.

tr.v. par·rot·ed, par·rot·ing, par·rots
To repeat or imitate, especially without understanding.

parrot

n 1: usually brightly colored zygodactyl tropical birds with short hooked beaks and the ability to mimic sounds 2: a copycat who does not understand the words or acts being imitated v : repeat mindlessly; "The students parroted the teacher's words"
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=parrot

Just-

posted 04 September 2005 04:13 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Puro Hybrido:
Most cultural anthropolgists reject the idea that there are pure races and "hybrid" races.

---

Most physical anthropologists reject this notion as well.

Populations should be viewed processually as dynamic entities over time and not “static” entities. The presence of M35/215 lineages and the Benin sickle cell variant in southern Europe illustrates this well. Racialists models which imply nonoverlapping gene pools......[are outdated.] - Dr. Shomarka Keita.

posted 04 September 2005 04:45 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
Most physical anthropologists reject this notion as well.

Populations should be viewed processually as dynamic entities over time and not “static” entities. The presence of M35/215 lineages and the Benin sickle cell variant in southern Europe illustrates this well. Racialists models which imply nonoverlapping gene pools......[are outdated.] - Dr. Shomarka Keita.

[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 04 September 2005).]

---

Cavalli-Sforza was also forced to admit that the classification of humans into races has proved to be a futile exercise and serves little porpuse.

posted 05 September 2005 06:43 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Babbling Ape:
Nice try loser, but you were attempting to refute Brace's comments on the Equatorial skin color of East Africans, by pretending he wasn't referring to skin color. Idiot.

---

I didn't know what he was referring to, you low-IQ slave, because you hadn't posted the full citation, only your distorted excerpt. I just assumed it was about craniofacial morphology since that's the topic of this thread. But now I realize that you were posting off-topic because you have no answers for this:

Just like your little lap-dog Super coon has no answers for this:

A = maternal ancestry
B = paternal ancestry

posted 05 September 2005 06:54 AM            

"As I see it, the appearances of the Upper Nile Valley and Horn people has little if anything to do with admixtures and much the result of in situ circumstances. The elongation of the nose is clearly a climate-induced phenomenon and takes a long time to manifest itself. The same thing is true for the reduction in tooth size which markedly distinguishes those people form the Niger-Congo people. One has to suggest that Vavilov's identification of that as one of the early areas of crop domestication would have meant that food preparation techniques reducing the pressures for mastication had been operating there for a long time, and tooth size reduction in situ would be one of the expected consequences.

Hope this helps,

C. L. Brace