posted
An Ivy league professor to boot! Is it any wonder why the cracker is such a low IQ Charlaton? Anyone reviewing Charlatan Coon's evidence based on superficial physical characteristics and outright distortion and lies has to agree That Charlatan Coon monkey sure was a brilliant man! You can tell how brilliant he was by how respected he is today by the caliber of monkey that uses him as a source in 2012 LOL
Coon was clearly a fool, a liar and a white supremacist racist, but he was right about ONE THING folks! The obvious biological differences between the cracker and true human beings! little did the fool know, that the sub species is the cracker! bwahahahaha!!!!!
The filthy, thin lipped, flat assed, stringy haired monkey now insists on talking about OUR ancestral fathers (Khoisan peoples)
You can shut the filthy wicked, low IQ monkey down quite easily by informing the reprobate that the Khoisan peoples possess ZERO% neanderthal admixture. This devil insists on talking about OUR ancestral fathers while neglecting its own zoo animals fathers, which happen to be 48 chromosome sprs (Neanderthal, Denosovan) I guess if my father was a 48 chromosome ape, Id lie and try to assume the identity of human being too! The crackers daddy is a 48 chromosome ape with some monley added in the ungodly mix too! (RH factor)
You really have to love watching this low IQ, degenerate pink assed monkley talk about cats! bwahahahaha!!!!! The filthy sub species reprobate does not even understand why I utilize the liger and Tigon in my dissection of the ape Hybrid, sub species cracker! LOL
ALL cats with the exception of some found in South Americas possess 38 chromosomes! that goes from a house cat to a Lion to a tiger. They ALL possess 38 chromosomes!
Lions and tigers share the same # of chromosomes but are two different species
Then same applies to dogs, which is another animal that these filthy monkeys love to utilize. ALL dogs from the poodle to the wolf share 78 chromsomes
Which brings us to the degenerate, filthy cracker! While it is true that these evil abominations possess 46 chromosomes... when you peep back the onion on these monmsters, you find RECENT common ancesters for these reprobates!
For example there is 48 chromosome ape Neanderthal, Denisovan)
Then you have 42 chromosome monkey (Rh factor)
and of course they also possess human DNA as well!
This MIX all happened within the last 100,000 years folks! There is absoluetl,y no question that the white man is not a true human! it is an ape hybrid and a sub species with THREE SEPERATE species of DNA running through this abominations veins
I guess if I were a low IQ pink assed monkey, Id be talking about cats too!
This enitire site except for myself is comprised of one person who has created fake names where he holds conversations with itself! There are too many of these fake names to list, because the fake names are EVERYone THAT posts here, and that includes EVERYONE except for myself of course! Some of the more prominent the fake names are 1) Mike111 2) The Lioness 3) clyde winters 4) Amun-Ra The Ultimate 5) Swenet 6) alTakruri 7) Charlie Bass 8) Doug M 9) Oshun 10) Egmond Codfried 11) Djehuti 12) Zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova 13) DHDoxies
YOU CAN LOOK AT A FEW OF THE MONKEYS FAKE WEBSITES HERE! THESE ARE JUST A FEW OF MANY THAT THIS PINK ASSED MONKEY USES TO TRY AND FOOL YOU
quote:Coon never said that minor Negroid affinities get in the way of a Mediterranean classification:
Although his skin is dark, his hair is nearly straight, and his measurements as well as his cranial and facial fea- tures are purely or almost purely Mediterranean. He shows no visible signs of negroid admixture, although from a purely genetic standpoint some must be present. --Coon
In the deserts and highlands of Ethiopia, Eritrea, and the Somalilands is found a con* centration of several related Mediterranean types, mixed in varying degrees with ne- groes. --Coon
lol, you liar. You really are desperate. Those two quotes have nothing to do with the "negroid tendencies" quote which are morphological.
Moving the goalpost, just like with your bizarre requirement to all of a sudden only quote academic multi-race proponents on whether tropical adaptations occur outside hot-humid regions, while your earlier requirements--before I exposed your fabrications via Templeton and Brace--were to quote from the anthropological literature in general.
Now you're doing the same thing here. Earlier, you said that folks who are classified as Mediterranean can have neither admixture nor phenotypical affinities with other 'races':
''If crania has admixture or affinities with another racial type, how does it belong to a single race category?'' --Faheemdunkers
And now, when I expose your fabricated claim that folks classified by Coon as Mediterranean cannot have Negroid admixture according to him, all of a sudden the requirements tighten up again, and only morphological evidence qualifies as evidence:
The fact a Caucasoid can have "negro genes" but looks 100% Caucasoid through distant admixture, does not make them have Negroid "affinity". They only have Negroid affinity if they show physical admixture --Faheemdunkers
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: What you are saying though is that Coon asserts crania that looks Negroid (to some extent) is Mediterranean - which is a lie and distortion.
Stop lying, fag. The prognathism and other visibly 'Negroid' traits in these men never got in the way of Coon's classification of these North African hybrids as 'Mediterranean', and they would utter fail your retarded pencil test:
In profile these two men, below, look very similar,
Posts: 22244 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
An Ivy league professor to boot! Is it any wonder why the cracker is such a low IQ Charlaton? Anyone reviewing Charlatan Coon's evidence based on superficial physical characteristics and outright distortion and lies has to agree That Charlatan Coon monkey sure was a brilliant man! You can tell how brilliant he was by how respected he is today by the caliber of monkey that uses him as a source in 2012 LOL
Coon was clearly a fool, a liar and a white supremacist racist, but he was right about ONE THING folks! The obvious biological differences between the cracker and true human beings! little did the fool know, that the sub species is the cracker! bwahahahaha!!!!!
The filthy, thin lipped, flat assed, stringy haired monkey now insists on talking about OUR ancestral fathers (Khoisan peoples)
You can shut the filthy wicked, low IQ monkey down quite easily by informing the reprobate that the Khoisan peoples possess ZERO% neanderthal admixture. This devil insists on talking about OUR ancestral fathers while neglecting its own zoo animals fathers, which happen to be 48 chromosome sprs (Neanderthal, Denosovan) I guess if my father was a 48 chromosome ape, Id lie and try to assume the identity of human being too! The crackers daddy is a 48 chromosome ape with some monley added in the ungodly mix too! (RH factor)
You really have to love watching this low IQ, degenerate pink assed monkley talk about cats! bwahahahaha!!!!! The filthy sub species reprobate does not even understand why I utilize the liger and Tigon in my dissection of the ape Hybrid, sub species cracker! LOL
ALL cats with the exception of some found in South Americas possess 38 chromosomes! that goes from a house cat to a Lion to a tiger. They ALL possess 38 chromosomes!
Lions and tigers share the same # of chromosomes but are two different species
Then same applies to dogs, which is another animal that these filthy monkeys love to utilize. ALL dogs from the poodle to the wolf share 78 chromsomes
Which brings us to the degenerate, filthy cracker! While it is true that these evil abominations possess 46 chromosomes... when you peep back the onion on these monmsters, you find RECENT common ancesters for these reprobates!
For example there is 48 chromosome ape Neanderthal, Denisovan)
Then you have 42 chromosome monkey (Rh factor)
and of course they also possess human DNA as well!
This MIX all happened within the last 100,000 years folks! There is absoluetl,y no question that the white man is not a true human! it is an ape hybrid and a sub species with THREE SEPERATE species of DNA running through this abominations veins
I guess if I were a low IQ pink assed monkey, Id be talking about cats too!
This enitire site except for myself is comprised of one person who has created fake names where he holds conversations with itself! There are too many of these fake names to list, because the fake names are EVERYone THAT posts here, and that includes EVERYONE except for myself of course! Some of the more prominent the fake names are 1) Mike111 2) The Lioness 3) clyde winters 4) Amun-Ra The Ultimate 5) Swenet 6) alTakruri 7) Charlie Bass 8) Doug M 9) Oshun 10) Egmond Codfried 11) Djehuti 12) Zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova 13) DHDoxies
YOU CAN LOOK AT A FEW OF THE MONKEYS FAKE WEBSITES HERE! THESE ARE JUST A FEW OF MANY THAT THIS PINK ASSED MONKEY USES TO TRY AND FOOL YOU
quote:Coon never said that minor Negroid affinities get in the way of a Mediterranean classification:
Although his skin is dark, his hair is nearly straight, and his measurements as well as his cranial and facial fea- tures are purely or almost purely Mediterranean. He shows no visible signs of negroid admixture, although from a purely genetic standpoint some must be present. --Coon
In the deserts and highlands of Ethiopia, Eritrea, and the Somalilands is found a con* centration of several related Mediterranean types, mixed in varying degrees with ne- groes. --Coon
lol, you liar. You really are desperate. Those two quotes have nothing to do with the "negroid tendencies" quote which are morphological.
Moving the goalpost, just like with your bizarre requirement to all of a sudden only quote academic multi-race proponents on whether tropical adaptations occur outside hot-humid regions, while your earlier requirements--before I exposed your fabrications via Templeton and Brace--were to quote from the anthropological literature in general.
Now you're doing the same thing here. Earlier, you said that folks who are classified as Mediterranean can have neither admixture nor phenotypical affinities with other 'races':
''If crania has admixture or affinities with another racial type, how does it belong to a single race category?'' --Faheemdunkers
And now, when I expose your fabricated claim that folks classified by Coon as Mediterranean cannot have Negroid admixture according to him, all of a sudden the requirements tighten up again, and only morphological evidence qualifies as evidence:
The fact a Caucasoid can have "negro genes" but looks 100% Caucasoid through distant admixture, does not make them have Negroid "affinity". They only have Negroid affinity if they show physical admixture --Faheemdunkers
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: What you are saying though is that Coon asserts crania that looks Negroid (to some extent) is Mediterranean - which is a lie and distortion.
Stop lying, fag. The prognathism and other visibly 'Negroid' traits in these men never got in the way of Coon's classification of these North African hybrids as 'Mediterranean', and they would utter fail your retarded pencil test:
In profile these two men, below, look very similar,
Of course. Similarities can also be seen in this man's profile:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: genetics is much better than physical morphology to determine a person's geographic ancestry But you prefer an older system wher you just look at somebody and make assumptions and then make up categories. Nature doesn't know these categories everything fades in stages into the other
posted
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- An Ivy league professor to boot! Is it any wonder why the cracker is such a low IQ Charlaton? Anyone reviewing Charlatan Coon's evidence based on superficial physical characteristics and outright distortion and lies has to agree That Charlatan Coon monkey sure was a brilliant man! You can tell how brilliant he was by how respected he is today by the caliber of monkey that uses him as a source in 2012 LOL
Coon was clearly a fool, a liar and a white supremacist racist, but he was right about ONE THING folks! The obvious biological differences between the cracker and true human beings! little did the fool know, that the sub species is the cracker! bwahahahaha!!!!!
The filthy, thin lipped, flat assed, stringy haired monkey now insists on talking about OUR ancestral fathers (Khoisan peoples)
You can shut the filthy wicked, low IQ monkey down quite easily by informing the reprobate that the Khoisan peoples possess ZERO% neanderthal admixture. This devil insists on talking about OUR ancestral fathers while neglecting its own zoo animals fathers, which happen to be 48 chromosome sprs (Neanderthal, Denosovan) I guess if my father was a 48 chromosome ape, Id lie and try to assume the identity of human being too! The crackers daddy is a 48 chromosome ape with some monley added in the ungodly mix too! (RH factor)
You really have to love watching this low IQ, degenerate pink assed monkley talk about cats! bwahahahaha!!!!! The filthy sub species reprobate does not even understand why I utilize the liger and Tigon in my dissection of the ape Hybrid, sub species cracker! LOL
ALL cats with the exception of some found in South Americas possess 38 chromosomes! that goes from a house cat to a Lion to a tiger. They ALL possess 38 chromosomes!
Lions and tigers share the same # of chromosomes but are two different species
Then same applies to dogs, which is another animal that these filthy monkeys love to utilize. ALL dogs from the poodle to the wolf share 78 chromsomes
Which brings us to the degenerate, filthy cracker! While it is true that these evil abominations possess 46 chromosomes... when you peep back the onion on these monmsters, you find RECENT common ancesters for these reprobates!
For example there is 48 chromosome ape Neanderthal, Denisovan)
Then you have 42 chromosome monkey (Rh factor)
and of course they also possess human DNA as well!
This MIX all happened within the last 100,000 years folks! There is absoluetl,y no question that the white man is not a true human! it is an ape hybrid and a sub species with THREE SEPERATE species of DNA running through this abominations veins
I guess if I were a low IQ pink assed monkey, Id be talking about cats too!
This enitire site except for myself is comprised of one person who has created fake names where he holds conversations with itself! There are too many of these fake names to list, because the fake names are EVERYone THAT posts here, and that includes EVERYONE except for myself of course! Some of the more prominent the fake names are 1) Mike111 2) The Lioness 3) clyde winters 4) Amun-Ra The Ultimate 5) Swenet 6) alTakruri 7) Charlie Bass 8) Doug M 9) Oshun 10) Egmond Codfried 11) Djehuti 12) Zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova 13) DHDoxies
YOU CAN LOOK AT A FEW OF THE MONKEYS FAKE WEBSITES HERE! THESE ARE JUST A FEW OF MANY THAT THIS PINK ASSED MONKEY USES TO TRY AND FOOL YOU
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: After having done nothing other than fabricating claims, you've now stooped to unashamedly fabricating false meaning that isn't even associated with the phrase ''moving the goalpost''. Picking an angle from which to dissect someone's retarded claim, while leaving other angles for later, is not moving the goalpost. You're so retarded, the next step up the ladder is being in a brain-dead vegetative state.
"Moving the goalposts, also known as raising the bar, is an informal logically fallacious argument in which evidence presented in response to a specific claim is dismissed and some other (often greater) evidence is demanded."
- Precisely how you have shifted from morphology to a genetic definition. Once you realised the former debunked your position you've changed the evidence of criteria to now genetics.
quote:Your flip flopping and face saving tactics aren't going to help you. You're only digging yourself in deeper. You yourself have claimed repeatedly that Coon always ascribed negroid traits in Mediterranean skeletons to negroid admixture. Now you're debunking yourself by stating that the two are always separated (you said that negroid genes in Mediterraneans don't imply negroid affinity, and that only negroid traits on Mediterraneans imply negroid affinity). Well, retarded jackass, if the former isn't true (that negroid geneflow makes Mediterranean skeletal remains more negroid), your false interpretation of Coon (that he always excused negroid traits by attributing it to foreign sources) can't be true either.
Your one drop rule again. Neither Coon, nor myself hold those views. You completely lost this debate and have shifted to the one drop rule and genetics. Coon's position, like mine, is that if crania shows morphological admixture, it is not homogenous. This is very different to the one drop rule you are setting up - that someone with distant Negroid ancestry but looks 100% Caucasoid is somehow not Caucasoid.
The one drop rule plays into the Afrocentrics' hands. You only have to look on this forum to see it employed. Certain females who by all standards look "white", the Afrocentric posters here claim are "mixed" such as Angelina Jolie.
quote:Of course you hold the position of the one drop rule.
No I don't.
quote:You've repeatedly admitted that Somali's, Cushitic speaking Ethiopians and Beja, in your view, are only 40% Caucasoid, yet you insist on labeling them according to their minority ancestral component (i.e., ''Caucasoid'').
No that's not true. I claimed most Ethiopians fall intermediate between Caucasoids/Negroids and are Aethiopid. This is backed up by anthropometrics and other physical studies. If they look mixed, then clearly they are - they are an interracial clinal population. This is different to your stupid one drop rule which ends up labelling people like Angelina Jolie or Chuck Norris "mixed" race.
quote:Fulani, Masai and Tutsi have even less than the supposed 40% Caucasoid component you ascribe to the aforementioned populations, yet you've called them Caucasoid too, rather than describing them by their predominant ancestral component.
I've never claimed those are Caucasoids. They are Nilo-Hamites, with a degree of Caucasoid admixture. Again an interracial cline.
The fallacy you are setting up is an old one which has led to silly threads by Doug and others where they claim "Pygmies are Caucasoids" and other nonsense.
quote:Clearly, if anyone is subscribing to the one drop rule (arbitrarily giving more weight to a minor(ity) ancestral component), its you.
Find a post I made where I claimed any of those populations are Caucasoid. You won't be able to.
quote:You're talking sh!t right now. Many of his Mediterranean types have no duplicate elsewhere in the world. He clearly identifies them as Mediterranean, and nowhere does he say they are hard to classify. He compares them with broad nosed Mediterraneans in prehistoric Europe, of which he says elsewhere that they resemble predynastic Egyptians. The obvious conclusion then, is that Khargans are not any different in these traits than Ancient Egyptians. LMAO. For a while now all you've been doing is tapdancing, trying to duck the fire I'm holding to your ass. LMAO. That's a good one: ''they are hard to fit into any racial taxon''.
You claimed those people are Meds, but Coon explicitly states they are not. Yet instead of admitting you are wrong, you post nothing but crap again. Everytime you claim Coon says something, I prove with a quote otherwise. You've been exposed as a repeated liar. It boils down to the fact you have never read the entire work, and are just pulling whatever you can from the text online. That's all Afrocentrics do. Can you imagine a "black" person actually sitting down and reading a book? Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Coon never said that minor Negroid affinities get in the way of a Mediterranean classification:
Although his skin is dark, his hair is nearly straight, and his measurements as well as his cranial and facial fea- tures are purely or almost purely Mediterranean. He shows no visible signs of negroid admixture, although from a purely genetic standpoint some must be present. --Coon
In the deserts and highlands of Ethiopia, Eritrea, and the Somalilands is found a con* centration of several related Mediterranean types, mixed in varying degrees with ne- groes. --Coon
lol, you liar. You really are desperate. Those two quotes have nothing to do with the "negroid tendencies" quote which are morphological.
Moving the goalpost, just like with your bizarre requirement to all of a sudden only quote academic multi-race proponents on whether tropical adaptations occur outside hot-humid regions, while your earlier requirements--before I exposed your fabrications via Templeton and Brace--were to quote from the anthropological literature in general.
Now you're doing the same thing here. Earlier, you said that folks who are classified as Mediterranean can have neither admixture nor phenotypical affinities with other 'races':
''If crania has admixture or affinities with another racial type, how does it belong to a single race category?'' --Faheemdunkers
And now, when I expose your fabricated claim that folks classified by Coon as Mediterranean cannot have Negroid admixture according to him, all of a sudden the requirements tighten up again, and only morphological evidence qualifies as evidence:
The fact a Caucasoid can have "negro genes" but looks 100% Caucasoid through distant admixture, does not make them have Negroid "affinity". They only have Negroid affinity if they show physical admixture --Faheemdunkers
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: What you are saying though is that Coon asserts crania that looks Negroid (to some extent) is Mediterranean - which is a lie and distortion.
Stop lying, fag. The prognathism and other visibly 'Negroid' traits in these men never got in the way of Coon's classification of these North African hybrids as 'Mediterranean', and they would utter fail your retarded pencil test:
In profile these two men, below, look very similar,
Of course. Similarities can also be seen in this man's profile:
I am sorry to disappoint you, but those are too negroid.
Here I have a "super cacasoid type"
Posts: 22244 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
An Ivy league professor to boot! Is it any wonder why the cracker is such a low IQ Charlaton? Anyone reviewing Charlatan Coon's evidence based on superficial physical characteristics and outright distortion and lies has to agree That Charlatan Coon monkey sure was a brilliant man! You can tell how brilliant he was by how respected he is today by the caliber of monkey that uses him as a source in 2012 LOL
Coon was clearly a fool, a liar and a white supremacist racist, but he was right about ONE THING folks! The obvious biological differences between the cracker and true human beings! little did the fool know, that the sub species is the cracker! bwahahahaha!!!!!
The filthy, thin lipped, flat assed, stringy haired monkey now insists on talking about OUR ancestral fathers (Khoisan peoples)
You can shut the filthy wicked, low IQ monkey down quite easily by informing the reprobate that the Khoisan peoples possess ZERO% neanderthal admixture. This devil insists on talking about OUR ancestral fathers while neglecting its own zoo animals fathers, which happen to be 48 chromosome sprs (Neanderthal, Denosovan) I guess if my father was a 48 chromosome ape, Id lie and try to assume the identity of human being too! The crackers daddy is a 48 chromosome ape with some monley added in the ungodly mix too! (RH factor)
You really have to love watching this low IQ, degenerate pink assed monkley talk about cats! bwahahahaha!!!!! The filthy sub species reprobate does not even understand why I utilize the liger and Tigon in my dissection of the ape Hybrid, sub species cracker! LOL
ALL cats with the exception of some found in South Americas possess 38 chromosomes! that goes from a house cat to a Lion to a tiger. They ALL possess 38 chromosomes!
Lions and tigers share the same # of chromosomes but are two different species
Then same applies to dogs, which is another animal that these filthy monkeys love to utilize. ALL dogs from the poodle to the wolf share 78 chromsomes
Which brings us to the degenerate, filthy cracker! While it is true that these evil abominations possess 46 chromosomes... when you peep back the onion on these monmsters, you find RECENT common ancesters for these reprobates!
For example there is 48 chromosome ape Neanderthal, Denisovan)
Then you have 42 chromosome monkey (Rh factor)
and of course they also possess human DNA as well!
This MIX all happened within the last 100,000 years folks! There is absoluetl,y no question that the white man is not a true human! it is an ape hybrid and a sub species with THREE SEPERATE species of DNA running through this abominations veins
I guess if I were a low IQ pink assed monkey, Id be talking about cats too!
This enitire site except for myself is comprised of one person who has created fake names where he holds conversations with itself! There are too many of these fake names to list, because the fake names are EVERYone THAT posts here, and that includes EVERYONE except for myself of course! Some of the more prominent the fake names are 1) Mike111 2) The Lioness 3) clyde winters 4) Amun-Ra The Ultimate 5) Swenet 6) alTakruri 7) Charlie Bass 8) Doug M 9) Oshun 10) Egmond Codfried 11) Djehuti 12) Zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova 13) DHDoxies
YOU CAN LOOK AT A FEW OF THE MONKEYS FAKE WEBSITES HERE! THESE ARE JUST A FEW OF MANY THAT THIS PINK ASSED MONKEY USES TO TRY AND FOOL YOU
quote:am sorry to disappoint you, but those are too negroid.
They are clinal types. No one is saying they are Caucasoids/Medish, however they aren't Negroid either. This is why Coon was trying to devise other taxons and subtaxons for such populations that don't fall into race category x or y. Hence terms like Aethiopid and Nilo-Hamitic are used to cluster composite (mixed) races.
Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Then what the hell do you call tropical deserts, dumb-phuck??
Stop purposely confusing the astronomical definition with climatic.
- Astronomy: Where you can see the sun at its zenith (between cancer/tropic of capricorn).
- Climatic: Humid heat zones.
Within the astronomical belt, there are non-tropical climates (arid/dry heat etc). So using that definition for tropical (climate) is false.
ROTFLMAO
You stupid-phuck!! The definition I gave is not "astronomical" but geological as it is based on the earth's curvature and areas of that curvature that receive the most sunlight! The sun is the source of all energy and heat on the surface of the earth and is what drives all weather systems i.e. climate!!
Humidity or aridity is another factor of climate based on the movement of water bearing clouds or precipitation but it has no bearing the amount of sunlight a region gets! That's why there are tropical areas with high humidity and tropical areas with low humidity i.e. high aridity.
This is why the very etymology of the word tropic has to do with the sun!! late 14c., "either of the two circles in the celestial sphere which describe the northernmost and southernmost points of the ecliptic," from L.L. tropicus "of or pertaining to the solstice" (as a noun, "one of the tropics"), from L. tropicus "pertaining to a turn," from Gk. tropikos "of or pertaining to a turn or change, or to the solstice" (as a noun, "the solstice"), from trope "a turning" (see trope). The notion is of the point at which the sun "turns back" after reaching its northernmost or southernmost point in the sky. Extended 1520s to the corresponding latitudes on the earth's surface (23 degrees 28 minutes north and south); meaning "region between these parallels" is from 1837. Tropical "hot and lush like the climate of the tropics" is first attested 1834.
LOL @ "astronomical". You stupid sh|t, we are not talking about stars or other planets. We are talking about EARTH and its weather patterns due to ONE star-- the sun-- which is the greatest factor of all in climate!! Unless of course you can tell us what energy source drives the atmospheric phenomena we call "weather" other than the sun (?)
quote:am sorry to disappoint you, but those are too negroid.
They are clinal types. No one is saying they are Caucasoids/Medish, however they aren't Negroid either. This is why Coon was trying to devise other taxons and subtaxons for such populations that don't fall into race category x or y. Hence terms like Aethiopid and Nilo-Hamitic are used to cluster composite (mixed) races.
I have never heard anyone in Africa use any of those awkward terms, let alone call themselves cacasoids, so I don't know what the hell you're talking about? I can tell you, if you use those terms there, you will be laughed at.
However, you got your traits from Africans who migrated from the African coast, abroad, to populate the word. REMEMBER THAT! See, you yourself have claimed that "the real negroe" is only because of recent adaption. So by that logic, the facial traits we speak of here are indigenous to Africa and are therefore ancient.
quote:Evolutionary history of mtDNA haplogroup structure in African populations inferred from mtDNA d-loop and RFLP analysis.
(A) Relationships among different mtDNA haplogroup lineages inferred from mtDNA d-loop sequences and mtDNA coding region SNPs from previous studies (Kivisild, Metspalu, et al. 2006). Dashed lines indicate previously unresolved relationships.(
B) Relative frequencies of haplogroups L0, L1, L5, L2, L3, M, and N in different regions of Africa from mtDNA d-loop and mtDNA coding region SNPs from previous studies.
(C) Relative frequencies of haplogroups L0, L1, and L5 subhaplogroups (excluding L2 and L3) in different regions of Africa from mtDNA d-loop and mtDNA coding region SNPs from previous studies. Haplogroup frequencies from previously published studies include East Africans (Ethiopia [Rosa et al. 2004], Kenya and Sudan [Watson et al. 1997; Rosa et al. 2004]), Mozambique (Pereira et al. 2001; Salas et al. 2002), Hadza (Vigilant et al. 1991), and Sukuma (Knight et al. 2003); South Africans (Botswana !Kung [Vigilant et al. 1991]); Central Africans (Mbenzele Pygmies [Destro-Bisol et al. 2004], Biaka Pygmies [Vigilant et al. 1991], and Mbuti Pygmies [Vigilant et al. 1991]); West Africans (Niger, Nigeria [Vigilant et al. 1991; Watson et al. 1997]; and Guinea [Rosa et al. 2004]). L1*, L2*, and L3* from previous studies indicate samples that were not further subdivided into subhaplogroups.
Whole-mtDNA Genome Sequence Analysis of Ancient African Lineages
posted
An Ivy league professor to boot! Is it any wonder why the cracker is such a low IQ Charlaton? Anyone reviewing Charlatan Coon's evidence based on superficial physical characteristics and outright distortion and lies has to agree That Charlatan Coon monkey sure was a brilliant man! You can tell how brilliant he was by how respected he is today by the caliber of monkey that uses him as a source in 2012 LOL
Coon was clearly a fool, a liar and a white supremacist racist, but he was right about ONE THING folks! The obvious biological differences between the cracker and true human beings! little did the fool know, that the sub species is the cracker! bwahahahaha!!!!!
The filthy, thin lipped, flat assed, stringy haired monkey now insists on talking about OUR ancestral fathers (Khoisan peoples)
You can shut the filthy wicked, low IQ monkey down quite easily by informing the reprobate that the Khoisan peoples possess ZERO% neanderthal admixture. This devil insists on talking about OUR ancestral fathers while neglecting its own zoo animals fathers, which happen to be 48 chromosome sprs (Neanderthal, Denosovan) I guess if my father was a 48 chromosome ape, Id lie and try to assume the identity of human being too! The crackers daddy is a 48 chromosome ape with some monley added in the ungodly mix too! (RH factor)
You really have to love watching this low IQ, degenerate pink assed monkley talk about cats! bwahahahaha!!!!! The filthy sub species reprobate does not even understand why I utilize the liger and Tigon in my dissection of the ape Hybrid, sub species cracker! LOL
ALL cats with the exception of some found in South Americas possess 38 chromosomes! that goes from a house cat to a Lion to a tiger. They ALL possess 38 chromosomes!
Lions and tigers share the same # of chromosomes but are two different species
Then same applies to dogs, which is another animal that these filthy monkeys love to utilize. ALL dogs from the poodle to the wolf share 78 chromsomes
Which brings us to the degenerate, filthy cracker! While it is true that these evil abominations possess 46 chromosomes... when you peep back the onion on these monmsters, you find RECENT common ancesters for these reprobates!
For example there is 48 chromosome ape Neanderthal, Denisovan)
Then you have 42 chromosome monkey (Rh factor)
and of course they also possess human DNA as well!
This MIX all happened within the last 100,000 years folks! There is absoluetl,y no question that the white man is not a true human! it is an ape hybrid and a sub species with THREE SEPERATE species of DNA running through this abominations veins
I guess if I were a low IQ pink assed monkey, Id be talking about cats too!
This enitire site except for myself is comprised of one person who has created fake names where he holds conversations with itself! There are too many of these fake names to list, because the fake names are EVERYone THAT posts here, and that includes EVERYONE except for myself of course! Some of the more prominent the fake names are 1) Mike111 2) The Lioness 3) clyde winters 4) Amun-Ra The Ultimate 5) Swenet 6) alTakruri 7) Charlie Bass 8) Doug M 9) Oshun 10) Egmond Codfried 11) Djehuti 12) Zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova 13) DHDoxies
YOU CAN LOOK AT A FEW OF THE MONKEYS FAKE WEBSITES HERE! THESE ARE JUST A FEW OF MANY THAT THIS PINK ASSED MONKEY USES TO TRY AND FOOL YOU
Look at the top of the chart, Neanderthals and Humans stem from a common ancestor you big dummy
Posts: 42939 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
An Ivy league professor to boot! Is it any wonder why the cracker is such a low IQ Charlaton? Anyone reviewing Charlatan Coon's evidence based on superficial physical characteristics and outright distortion and lies has to agree That Charlatan Coon monkey sure was a brilliant man! You can tell how brilliant he was by how respected he is today by the caliber of monkey that uses him as a source in 2012 LOL
Coon was clearly a fool, a liar and a white supremacist racist, but he was right about ONE THING folks! The obvious biological differences between the cracker and true human beings! little did the fool know, that the sub species is the cracker! bwahahahaha!!!!!
The filthy, thin lipped, flat assed, stringy haired monkey now insists on talking about OUR ancestral fathers (Khoisan peoples)
You can shut the filthy wicked, low IQ monkey down quite easily by informing the reprobate that the Khoisan peoples possess ZERO% neanderthal admixture. This devil insists on talking about OUR ancestral fathers while neglecting its own zoo animals fathers, which happen to be 48 chromosome sprs (Neanderthal, Denosovan) I guess if my father was a 48 chromosome ape, Id lie and try to assume the identity of human being too! The crackers daddy is a 48 chromosome ape with some monley added in the ungodly mix too! (RH factor)
You really have to love watching this low IQ, degenerate pink assed monkley talk about cats! bwahahahaha!!!!! The filthy sub species reprobate does not even understand why I utilize the liger and Tigon in my dissection of the ape Hybrid, sub species cracker! LOL
ALL cats with the exception of some found in South Americas possess 38 chromosomes! that goes from a house cat to a Lion to a tiger. They ALL possess 38 chromosomes!
Lions and tigers share the same # of chromosomes but are two different species
Then same applies to dogs, which is another animal that these filthy monkeys love to utilize. ALL dogs from the poodle to the wolf share 78 chromsomes
Which brings us to the degenerate, filthy cracker! While it is true that these evil abominations possess 46 chromosomes... when you peep back the onion on these monmsters, you find RECENT common ancesters for these reprobates!
For example there is 48 chromosome ape Neanderthal, Denisovan)
Then you have 42 chromosome monkey (Rh factor)
and of course they also possess human DNA as well!
This MIX all happened within the last 100,000 years folks! There is absoluetl,y no question that the white man is not a true human! it is an ape hybrid and a sub species with THREE SEPERATE species of DNA running through this abominations veins
I guess if I were a low IQ pink assed monkey, Id be talking about cats too!
This enitire site except for myself is comprised of one person who has created fake names where he holds conversations with itself! There are too many of these fake names to list, because the fake names are EVERYone THAT posts here, and that includes EVERYONE except for myself of course! Some of the more prominent the fake names are 1) Mike111 2) The Lioness 3) clyde winters 4) Amun-Ra The Ultimate 5) Swenet 6) alTakruri 7) Charlie Bass 8) Doug M 9) Oshun 10) Egmond Codfried 11) Djehuti 12) Zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova 13) DHDoxies
YOU CAN LOOK AT A FEW OF THE MONKEYS FAKE WEBSITES HERE! THESE ARE JUST A FEW OF MANY THAT THIS PINK ASSED MONKEY USES TO TRY AND FOOL YOU
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Then what the hell do you call tropical deserts, dumb-phuck??
Stop purposely confusing the astronomical definition with climatic.
- Astronomy: Where you can see the sun at its zenith (between cancer/tropic of capricorn).
- Climatic: Humid heat zones.
Within the astronomical belt, there are non-tropical climates (arid/dry heat etc). So using that definition for tropical (climate) is false.
ROTFLMAO
You stupid-phuck!! The definition I gave is not "astronomical" but geological as it is based on the earth's curvature and areas of that curvature that receive the most sunlight! The sun is the source of all energy and heat on the surface of the earth and is what drives all weather systems i.e. climate!!
Humidity or aridity is another factor of climate based on the movement of water bearing clouds or precipitation but it has no bearing the amount of sunlight a region gets! That's why there are tropical areas with high humidity and tropical areas with low humidity i.e. high aridity.
This is why the very etymology of the word tropic has to do with the sun!! late 14c., "either of the two circles in the celestial sphere which describe the northernmost and southernmost points of the ecliptic," from L.L. tropicus "of or pertaining to the solstice" (as a noun, "one of the tropics"), from L. tropicus "pertaining to a turn," from Gk. tropikos "of or pertaining to a turn or change, or to the solstice" (as a noun, "the solstice"), from trope "a turning" (see trope). The notion is of the point at which the sun "turns back" after reaching its northernmost or southernmost point in the sky. Extended 1520s to the corresponding latitudes on the earth's surface (23 degrees 28 minutes north and south); meaning "region between these parallels" is from 1837. Tropical "hot and lush like the climate of the tropics" is first attested 1834.
LOL @ "astronomical". You stupid sh|t, we are not talking about stars or other planets. We are talking about EARTH and its weather patterns due to ONE star-- the sun-- which is the greatest factor of all in climate!! Unless of course you can tell us what energy source drives the atmospheric phenomena we call "weather" other than the sun (?)
^ Yes I've read that study years ago when it first came out as well as others similar to it. The point is, the geological phenomenon of weather or weather cycle i.e. climate is tied to the sun because the sun is the source of all meteorological energy. It is the sun's heat that propels air currents which move clouds as well as heat the oceans which also create currents that feed clouds with water. My original point is that latitude is just as much a factor in climate as is elevation and humidity. The tropics is a latitudinal zone that receives the most sunlight due to the curvature of the earth. Because it gets the most direct rays, the zone is the hottest area of the earth. Whether there is high humidity or low humidity, that is irrelevant to to the tropics.
But of course the Farthead just ignored my posts. He ignores facts that destroy him as if pretending they aren't there will not hinder him. LOLPosts: 26286 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol: I am sorry to disappoint you, but those are too negroid.
Here I have a "super cacasoid type"
LOL The Natufians are also too 'negroid' but it doesn't matter because they are classified as 'Meterranean Cacasoid' based merely on the whims of desperate Euronuts.
By the way, the man in the above photo reminds me a lot of the Samburu man below except lighter in hue.
I guess Samburu people are super cacasoid.
Ancient Egyptian pharaoh with similar nose.
By the way, Saharan Berbers like the Tuareg and Sanhaja as well as Nilotes show close cranial affinities with Egyptians as well.
Posts: 26286 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
An Ivy league professor to boot! Is it any wonder why the cracker is such a low IQ Charlaton? Anyone reviewing Charlatan Coon's evidence based on superficial physical characteristics and outright distortion and lies has to agree That Charlatan Coon monkey sure was a brilliant man! You can tell how brilliant he was by how respected he is today by the caliber of monkey that uses him as a source in 2012 LOL
Coon was clearly a fool, a liar and a white supremacist racist, but he was right about ONE THING folks! The obvious biological differences between the cracker and true human beings! little did the fool know, that the sub species is the cracker! bwahahahaha!!!!!
The filthy, thin lipped, flat assed, stringy haired monkey now insists on talking about OUR ancestral fathers (Khoisan peoples)
You can shut the filthy wicked, low IQ monkey down quite easily by informing the reprobate that the Khoisan peoples possess ZERO% neanderthal admixture. This devil insists on talking about OUR ancestral fathers while neglecting its own zoo animals fathers, which happen to be 48 chromosome sprs (Neanderthal, Denosovan) I guess if my father was a 48 chromosome ape, Id lie and try to assume the identity of human being too! The crackers daddy is a 48 chromosome ape with some monley added in the ungodly mix too! (RH factor)
You really have to love watching this low IQ, degenerate pink assed monkley talk about cats! bwahahahaha!!!!! The filthy sub species reprobate does not even understand why I utilize the liger and Tigon in my dissection of the ape Hybrid, sub species cracker! LOL
ALL cats with the exception of some found in South Americas possess 38 chromosomes! that goes from a house cat to a Lion to a tiger. They ALL possess 38 chromosomes!
Lions and tigers share the same # of chromosomes but are two different species
Then same applies to dogs, which is another animal that these filthy monkeys love to utilize. ALL dogs from the poodle to the wolf share 78 chromsomes
Which brings us to the degenerate, filthy cracker! While it is true that these evil abominations possess 46 chromosomes... when you peep back the onion on these monmsters, you find RECENT common ancesters for these reprobates!
For example there is 48 chromosome ape Neanderthal, Denisovan)
Then you have 42 chromosome monkey (Rh factor)
and of course they also possess human DNA as well!
This MIX all happened within the last 100,000 years folks! There is absoluetl,y no question that the white man is not a true human! it is an ape hybrid and a sub species with THREE SEPERATE species of DNA running through this abominations veins
I guess if I were a low IQ pink assed monkey, Id be talking about cats too!
This enitire site except for myself is comprised of one person who has created fake names where he holds conversations with itself! There are too many of these fake names to list, because the fake names are EVERYone THAT posts here, and that includes EVERYONE except for myself of course! Some of the more prominent the fake names are 1) Mike111 2) The Lioness 3) clyde winters 4) Amun-Ra The Ultimate 5) Swenet 6) alTakruri 7) Charlie Bass 8) Doug M 9) Oshun 10) Egmond Codfried 11) Djehuti 12) Zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova 13) DHDoxies
YOU CAN LOOK AT A FEW OF THE MONKEYS FAKE WEBSITES HERE! THESE ARE JUST A FEW OF MANY THAT THIS PINK ASSED MONKEY USES TO TRY AND FOOL YOU
quote:However, you got your traits from Africans who migrated from the African coast, abroad
Cro-Magnons populated Europe from West Asia, not Africa. Furthermore all the evidence shows the Cro-Magnons were Caucasoid: thin nosed, orthognathic, medium brow ridged and palaeolithic artwork depicts wavy hair. None of those traits are Negroid.
Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:However, you got your traits from Africans who migrated from the African coast, abroad
Cro-Magnons populated Europe from West Asia, not Africa. Furthermore all the evidence shows the Cro-Magnons were Caucasoid: thin nosed, orthognathic, medium brow ridged and palaeolithic artwork depicts wavy hair. None of those traits are Negroid.
I beg to differ. So how do you think, WEST ASIA GOT POPULATED? LOL
quote:"Molecular biology has traced the ancestry of the Cro-Magnons deep into tropical Africa, into the territory of the hypothetical African Eve"...
--Cro-Magnon:How the Ice Age Gave Birth to the First Modern Humans, By Brian Fagan,pg 89 (2010).
--B. Lewis et al. 2008. Understanding Humans: Introduction to Physical Anthropology and Archaeology. p 297
quote:Evolutionary history of mtDNA haplogroup structure in African populations inferred from mtDNA d-loop and RFLP analysis.
(B) Relative frequencies of haplogroups L0, L1, L5, L2, L3, M, and N in different regions of Africa from mtDNA d-loop and mtDNA coding region SNPs from previous studies.
--Norman A. Johnson (2007) Darwinian Detectives: Revealing the Natural History of Genes and Genomes pg100
quote:Genetic evidence of an early exit of Homo sapiens sapiens from Africa through eastern Africa
The mitochondrial haplogroup M, first regarded as an ancient marker of East-Asian origin4, 5, has been found at high frequency in India6 and Ethiopia7, raising the question of its origin.(A haplogroup is a group of haplotypes that share some sequence variations.) Its variation and geographical distribution suggest that Asian haplogroup M separated from eastern-African haplogroup M more than 50,000 years ago.
Two other variants (489C and 10873C) also support a single origin of haplogroup M in Africa.
These findings, together with the virtual absence of haplogroup M in the Levant and its high frequency in the South-Arabian peninsula, render M the first genetic indicator for the hypothesized exit route from Africa through eastern Africa/western India. This was possibly the only successful early dispersal event of modern humans out of Africa.
quote:In modern humans, this elongation is a pattern characteristic of warm-adapted populations, and this physique may be an early Cro-Magnon retention from African ancestors. Similar retentions may be observed in certain indices of facial shape ...
--Encyclopedia of Human Evolution and Prehistory: Second Edition by Eric Delson
Posts: 22244 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Excellent work as usual Patrol. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
RECAP:
1-- Detailed modern cranial studies show Cro-magnon crania clustering AWAY from today’s Europeans. Brace 2005 testedthe “Cro-magnid” claim and found it “folklore.” QUOTE: "When canonical variates are plotted, neither sample ties in with Cro-Magnon as was once suggested. .. If this analysis shows nothing else, it demonstrates that the oft-repeated European feeling that the Cro-Magnons are “us” (46) is more a product of anthropological folklore than the result of the metric data available from the skeletal remains..." --CL. Brace 2005. The Questionable contribution of the Neolithic to European craniofacial form
----------------------------- Limb proportions confirm Brace's cranial analysis "Upper Palaeolithic humans not only were taller and had more robust bones in comparison with the Linear Band Pottery Culture Neolithic people; they also had longer limbs, a shorter trunk and, similar to modern African people, very long forearms and crural segments. ---Michael Hermanussen (2003) Stature of early Europeans. HORMONES 2003, 2(3):175-178
2–Africans possessing the highest phenotypical diversity on earth, producing variants covering most features. Several Cro-Magnon specimens are described as ‘negroid.’ QUOTE:
“Both methods for estimating regional diversity show sub-Saharan Africato have the highest levels of phenotypic variation consistent with many genetic studies.“ [-- Relethford, John "Global Analysis of Regional Differences in Craniometric Diversity .” Hum Bio v73, n5, -629-636])
---------------------- Three scholars (Arthur Keith, M Boule and HV Valloid found ‘negroid’Cro-Magnon features: QUOTE: "The ancient Grimaldi woman and boy are of the mixed or negroid type." --(Arthur Keith. Ancient Types of Man. p. 60)
3- Several Upper Paleolithic European specimens show high cural indices in limb proportions- more akin to dark-skinned tropical Africans than today’s Europeans, who show lower cural indices. QUOTE: "As with all the other limb/trunk indices, the recent Europeans evince lower indices, reflective of shorter tibiae, and the recent sub-Saharan Africans have higher indices, reflective of their long tibiae... The Dolno Vestonice and Pavlov humans.. have body proportions similar to those of other Gravettian specimens. Specifically, they are characterized by high bracial and cural indices, indicative of distal limb segment elongation.." --Trinkaus and Svoboda. 2005. Early Modern Human Evolution in Central Europe]
– AND--
-Body proportions of early European H. sapiens fossils suggest a tropical adaptation and support an African origin (Holliday & Trinkaus, 1991; Ruff, 1994; Pearson, 1997, 2000; Holliday, 1997, 1998, 2000).” -–McBrearty and Brooks 2000. The Revolution that Wasn’t. Jrn Hu Evo 39, 453-563
AND --
Upper Paleolithic Europeans resembled modern Africans -2003 data
"Upper Palaeolithic humans not only were taller and had more robust bones in comparison with the Linear Band Pottery Culture Neolithic people; they also had longer limbs, a shorter trunk and, similar to modern African people, very long forearms and crural segments. ---Michael Hermanussen (2003) Stature of early Europeans. HORMONES 2003, 2(3):175-178 -----------------
4-- Traits like narrow noses occur naturally in African environments: ".. low mean nasal indices (high, narrow noses) tend to [also] be found in arid regions, such as the desert areas of east Africa.. -- Mays. S. (2010). The Archaeology of Human Bones. Pg 100-101
5-- Several Upper Paleolithic European types- Predmost (Czech), Combo Capelle (France) Grimaldi (Italy) and Teviec (France) show a variant of “African” affinities like prognathism. Some scholars hold this to be an ‘Eastern Cro-Magnon’ variant: QUOTE:
------ "others like Predomost and to a lesser degree Grimaldi and Teviec, are more prognathic like Skhul 5." --Marta Mirazón Lahr. 2005. The Evolution of Modern Human Diversity: A Study of Cranial Variation
and
---------- ".. on whose basis, many specialists define the eastern Cro-Magnon variant in the Upper Paleolithic population of western Europe." --S. De Laet (1994). History of Humanity, UNESCO
6– DNA provides clear evidence of tropical African types migrating to Paleolithic era Europe, contradicting claims of “Caucasoid” evolution in situ. Tropical limb evidence confirms DNA. The African tropical types may have interbred with local Neanderthals, but in any event would have adapted to the colder conditions of Europe over time. QUOTE:
"Early modern Europeans reflect both their predominant African early modern human ancestry and a substantial degree of admixture between those early modern humans and the indigenous Neandertals. Given the tens of millennia since then and the limitations inherent in ancient DNA, this process is largely invisible in the molecular record. It is readily apparent in the paleontological record.“ --E. Trinkhaus (2004) European early modern humans and the fate of the Neandertals. PNAS 2007 vol. 104 no. 18 7367-7372
and
"The so-called Old Man [Cro-Magnon 1] became the original model for what was once termed the Cro-Magnon or Upper Paleolithic "race" of Europe.. there's no such valid biological category, and Cro-Magnon 1 is not typical of Upper Paleolithic western Europeans- and not even all that similar to the other two make skulls found at the site. Most of the genetic evidence, as well as the newest fossil evidence from Africa argue against continuous local evolution producing modern groups directly from any Eurasian pre-modern population.. there's no longer much debate that a large genetic contribution from migrating early modern Africans infuenced other groups throughout the Old World.“ --B. Lewis et al. 2008. Understanding Humans: Introduction to Physical Anthropology and Archaeology. p 297
Credible mainstream scholars dismiss attempts at any "Caucasoid race" labeling for the ancient remains of East Africa. Africans the most diverse, making such labels inaccurate and irrelevant
“In other parts of Africa there is much more variation, disclosing a mosaic of forms, some unrelated to recent groups (Lukenya Hill - Gramly and Rightmire, 1973), others with possible Khoi-San affinities (Neolithic crania associated with the Wilton tradition of Kenya), others with clear Negro traits (Ishango, Congo - Ferembach, 1986c; Howells, 1959; Rightmire, 1975b; Chad, Tamaya Mellet in Niger, and El Guettara in Mali - Chamla, 1968; Asselar, Ibalaghen, Tin Lalou sites - Chamla, 1968), and yet still others suggesting trans-Saharan movements (Wadi Halfa, Jebel Sahaba - Anderson, 1968; Greene and Armelagos, 1972)..”
..These findings are very important, for they suggest that not only late Pleistocene to early Holocene remains like Gamble's Cave and Elmenteita should not be interpreted as Caucasoid immigrants, but that the great levels of cranial variation observed today in sub-Saharan Africa were probably even greater in the late Pleistocene. “ ----Marta Lahr 1996. The Evolution of Modern Human Diversity: A Study of Cranial Variation. pg 283
Scientists reveal face of the first European The face of the first European has been recreated from bone fragments by scientists.
By Urmee Khan, Digital and Media Correspondent
8:22PM BST 04 May 2009
The head was rebuilt in clay based on an incomplete skull and jawbone discovered in a cave in the south west of the Carpathian Mountains in Romania by potholers. The first modern European Forensic artist Richard Neave reconstructed the face based on skull fragments from 35000 years ago.
Using radiocarbon analysis scientists say the man or woman, it is still not possible to determine the sex, lived between 34,000 and 36,000 years ago.
Europe was then occupied by both Neanderthal man, who had been in the region for thousands of years, and anatomically-modern humans – Homo sapiens.
Modern humans first arrived in Europe from Africa.
Research by geneticists and archaeologists has allowed them to trace the origins of modern homo sapiens back to a single group of people who managed to cross from the Horn of Africa and into Arabia. From there they went on to colonise the rest of the world.
Genetic analysis of modern day human populations in Europe, Asia, Australia, North America and South America have revealed that they are all descended from these common ancestors.
It is thought that changes in the climate between 90,000 and 70,000 years ago caused sea levels to drop dramatically and allowed the crossing of the Red Sea to take place.
The findings are to be revealed in a new BBC Two documentary series, The Incredible Human Journey, that traces the prehistoric origins of the human species.
Dr Peter Forster, a senior lecturer in archaeogenetics at Anglia Ruskin University in Cambridge who carried out some of the genetic work, said: "The founder populations cannot have been very big. We are talking about just a few hundred individuals." Homo sapiens, known casually as "modern humans", are thought to have first evolved around 195,000 years ago in east Africa – the earliest remains from that time were uncovered near the Omo River in Ethiopia. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parents of "Eurasian Adam" and "Eurasian Eve" came from Africa modern DNA analysis shows
"The vast majority, perhaps all, men with European and Asian genetic backgrounds can trace their Y-chromosome lineage back to a particular male (named M168, after the marker that defines these chromosomes). M168 thus can be considered the Eurasian Adam. Although the Y-chromosome Adam and mitrochondrial Eve did not meet, it is quite possible that the Eurasian "Adam" M168 could have met his equivalent, the Eurasian Eve (known as L3). The estimates of their dates overlap (around five thousand years ago) and they both probably lived in northeast Africa. Africa? Yes, Africa. Although nearly all Eurasian mtDNA and Y chromosomes currently existing can be traced back to L3 and M168 respectively, M168 and L3 also had African descendants." ---Norman Johnson (2007) Darwinian Detectives: Revealing the Natural History of Genes and Genomes. p. 100. [Norman A. Johnson, an evolutionary geneticist, is the author of numerous research publications, mainly in the genetics and evolution of reproductive isolation between nascent species. Johnson has taught at the University of Chicago, University of Texas at Arlington, and the University of Massachusetts].
Advanced cognitive, technological and behavioral patterns derive from Africa. Dubbed the "Human Revolution" by some researchers, they lead up to the expansion of humans from Africa to other parts of the world, circa 60-40kya. Other scholars argue for a more gradual continuum of advances deeply rooted in Africa that spread worldwide. In either scenario, whether relatively rapid advance or gradual accumulation, the cognitive, technological and behavioral advances took place within Africa.
QUOTE: "Recent research has provided increasing support for the origins of anatomically and genetically "modern" human populations in Africa between 150,000 and 200,000 years ago, followed by a major dispersal of these populations to both Asia and Europe sometime after ca. 65,000 before present (B.P.). However, the central question of why it took these populations {approx}100,000 years to disperse from Africa to other regions of the world has never been clearly resolved. It is suggested here that the answer may lie partly in the results of recent DNA studies of present-day African populations, combined with a spate of new archaeological discoveries in Africa. Studies of both the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) mismatch patterns in modern African populations and related mtDNA lineage-analysis patterns point to a major demographic expansion centered broadly within the time range from 80,000 to 60,000 B.P., probably deriving from a small geographical region of Africa.
Recent archaeological discoveries in southern and eastern Africa suggest that, at approximately the same time, there was a major increase in the complexity of the technological, economic, social, and cognitive behavior of certain African groups, which could have led to a major demographic expansion of these groups in competition with other, adjacent groups. It is suggested that this complex of behavioral changes (possibly triggered by the rapid environmental changes around the transition from oxygen isotope stage 5 to stage 4) could have led not only to the expansion of the L2 and L3 mitochondrial lineages over the whole of Africa but also to the ensuing dispersal of these modern populations over most regions of Asia, Australasia, and Europe, and their replacement (with or without interbreeding) of the preceding "archaic" populations in these regions." ---Mellars, Paul (2006) Why did modern human populations disperse from Africa ca. 60,000 years ago? A new model. PNAS, 2006, 103(25), pp. 9381-9386
Advanced cognitive, artistic and behavioral patterns and technology like more refined tools are found in Africa long before similar patterns arose in Europe. The migration of tropical African types to Europe in the Cro-Magnon era brought these cognitive, cultural and behavioral advances to Neanderthal Europe.
"A more gradual "revolution" position is now held [by Paul Mellars].. a period of accelerated change in Africa between about 60,000 and 80,000 years ago, as shown by the following developments recorded in South African cave sites: new and better- techniques for producing long thin flakes of stone blades; specialized tools called end scrapers and burins, which were probably used for working skins and bones, the [production of tiny stone segments that must have mounted on handles of wood or bone to make composite tools, complexly shaped stone tools such as 'leaf points', relatively complex bone tools; marine shells perforated to make necklaces or bracelets, red ochre (natural iron oxide) engraved with geometric designs suggesting early artwork,; greater permanence and differentiated occupation areas in caves; new subsistence practices such as the exploitation of marine fish as well as shellfish; and perhaps intentional burning of undergrowth to encourage the growth of underground plant resources such as tubers. Mellars suggests that a neurological switch to modernity in the brain alongside rapid Climatic fluctuations, could have been the driving forces behind this period of heightened cultural innovations.."
"The most impressive site for early evidence of symbolism however, is Blombos Cave in South Africa, with a record stretching well beyond 70,000 years ago.. The stone tools in these levels include Still Bay points, beautifully shaped thin lanceolate spear points, flaked on both sides. They also show the earliest application of a refined stone tool-making technique known as pressure flaking, some 55,000 years before its best-known manifestation in the Soultrean industry of EUrope. Slabs of red ochre were excavated from various levels, including the deepest ones, with wavy, fan or mesh-shaped patterns carefully engraved on them.. Hundreds [beads made from seashells] have now been excavated from Blombos, and most show signs of piercing, with many holes also displaying signs of wear.. The shells have a natural shiny luster, but the color seems to have been modified by rubbing with hematite in some cases and by heating to darken the shells in other cases, so they may have been strung in different-colored patterns.. " --Chris Stringer (2012) Lone Survivors: How we came to be the only human on earth 150-155
]
Some archaeologists criticize notions of a "human revolution" suddenly occurring after humans exited Africa for Asia and Europe. Instead they argue, the supposed "revolutionary" changes in cognition, symbol manipulation, advanced technology, trade etc were ALREADY occurring WITHIN Africa, long before any migration out. There is no need for a 'eureka moment' of 'progress' upon leaving Africa. 'Progress' was already well underway and long in place within Africa, without the need for 'eureka' moments. QUOTE:
"This is because by focusing on changes that occurred at the Middle Paleolithic/Upper Paleolithic or Middle Stone Age/Later Stone Age transitions (in Europe and Africa, respectively), there is a failure to appreciate the depth and breadth of the African Middle Stone Age record that preceded the time of the supposed revolution by at least 100,000 years. In their view, [McBrearty and Brooks 2000] 'modern' features such as advanced technologies, increased geographic range, specialized hunting, fishing and shell-fishing, long distance trade, and the symbolic use of pigments had already developed in a broad range of Middle Stone Age industries right across Africa, between 100,000 and 250,000 years ago. This suggested to them that an early assembly of the package of modern human behaviors occurred in Africa, followed by much later export to the rest of the world. Thus the origin of our species, both behaviorally and morphologically, was linked to early developments in Middle Stone Age technology, and not to changes that occurred much later.. 'this quest for this 'eureka moment' reveals a great deal about the needs, desired and aspirations of archaeologists, but obscures rather than illuminates events in the past.." --Chris Stringer (2012) Lone Survivors: How we came to be the only human on earth 128-29
The bogus "generalized Caucasoids" model. This involves defining away Africoid affinities or features as "generalized" but at the same time ot treating "European" features the same way. The double standard only runs one way- if a feature has African affinities- airbrush it away as "generalized" but otherwise call it "Caucasoid" or equivalent. This double-standard howevert is contradicted by Africa's diversity, and clear tropical body/limb proportion affinities of its migrating peoples
For example, Jantz and Ousley 2003 assert that: "Upper Paleolithic crania are, for the most part, larger and more generalized versions of recent Europeans." (AJPA 121(2))
But their wording gives the game away. They achieve a "match" with "recent Europeans" because features deemed to have African affinities are defined away as "generalized." The African irritant thus eliminated, they can then go on to cluster all else with Europe. Two central points undermine this method:
-----------CRANIA Africa has the most diversity in crania in the world. It has almost any skull variation on earth. This diversity DECREASES the farther one goes from Africa. As one of the world's foremost palentologists Chris Stringer notes:
[i]"Africa today has the greatest internal genetic variation of any inhabited continent and its skull shapes show the highest variation. This is usually attributed to its greater size, larger ancient populations and deepest timelines for humanity." ----Chris Stringer (2012) Lone Survivors: How we came to be the only human on earth p260
-----------TROPICAL LIMB/BODY ADAPTATIONS "Erik Trinkhaus noted that the Cro-Magnons who livd in much the same environments as Neanderthals were more like recent African populations in body shape than Neanderthals. And the same thing now seems to apply to the earliest modern skeleton we have from the north of Ice Age China." ----Chris Stringer (2012) Lone Survivors: How we came to be the only human on earth p105
Qafzeh/Skhul remains cluster more with tropical Africans and show similarities to Cro-Magnons. They are not identical, nor are they direct parents, but they show certain affinities- Cro-Magnons themselves also showing tropical affinities.
i]"The Qafzeh/Skhul sample is fundamentally modern, and in fact very similar to Cro-Magons.." --Geoffrey A. Clark, Catherine M. Willermet. 1997. Conceptual Issues in Modern Human Origins Research. p111
"Results indicate that the Qafzeh-Skhul hominids have African-like, or tropically adapted, proportions, while those from Amud, Kebara, Tabun, and Shanidar (Iraq) have more European-like, or cold-adapted, proportions. This suggests that there were in fact two distinct Western Asian populations and that the Qafzeh-Skhul hominids were likely African in origin - a result consistent with the "Replacement" model of modern human origins.
.. Thus, the discovery of tropically adapted hominids in the region would therefore likely indicate population dispersal from the TROPICS, and the most logical geographic source for such an influx is Africa. In this regard, Trinkaus (1981, 1984, 1995) and Ruff (1994) have argued that the high brachial and crural indices, narrow biiliac breadths, and small relative femoral head sizes of the Qafzeh-Skhul hominids suggest an influx of African genes associated with the emergence of modern humans in the region." ---Trenton Holliday (2000) Evolution at the Crossroads: Modern Human Emergence in Western Asia. American Anthropologist. New Series, Vol. 102, No. 1, 54-68
In summary, Cro-Magnons were tropically adapted migrants to Europe that resembled tropical Africans. They were never IDENTICAL to tropical Africans for they adapted over time to colder European environments. However several specimens still show evidence of African links. Africa in addition has the highest phenotypic diversity in the world. For example, skull shapes on African fossils for example are the most diverse. They cover most known variants in skull shape on earth- thru the ages. Everything else is a more limited subset of this diversity. Its worth repeating:
"Africa today has the greatest internal genetic variation of any inhabited continent and its skull shapes show the highest variation. This is usually attributed to its greater size, larger ancient populations and deepest timelines for humanity." ----Chris Stringer (2012) Lone Survivors: How we came to be the only human on earth p260
When in comes to Cro-Magnons's Eurocentric writers play a hypocritical double game, defining away African features as "generalized" but not doing the same when it comes to their favorite "European" fossils. Thus a dark-skinned, broad nosed, prognathous fossil with tropical limb proportions becomes "generalized[/img] features" but a narrow nose (common in Africa by the way) conveniently becomes "European". Can we all say hypocrisy?
Blombos- Africa: oldest pigment production operation on earth. Advanced cognitive, behavioral, technological and social features were already in place and ongoing before any migration out of Africa.
Assorted Multi-regionalists like Michael Wolpoff deny such diversity, but that denial is hollow in the face of substantial evidence of the Out OF Africa model. Four prominent multi-regionalists along with Wolpoff claimed in 1994 for example- QUOTE:
"The evolutionary patterns of three different regions show that the earliest "modern" humans are not Africans and do not have the complex of features that characterize the Africans of that time or any other... There is no evidence of specific admixture with Africans at any time, let alone replacement by them.. " END WOLPOFF et all quote.
But, Wolpoff et al are comprehensively refuted by fossil and DNA evidence of the Out OF Africa model: Respected paleontologist Chris Stringer notes: (continued)
"This model gave Africa no special place in our evolution and claimed specific connections in individual features between Homo erectus fossils more than a million years old in each region and humans in the same regions today.. these particular views have been pretty comprehensively shown to be false." ----Chris Stringer (2012) Lone Survivors: How we came to be the only human on earth p267
Other scholars attest to African affinities of Cro-Magnon via DNA quote: "Molecular biology has traced the ancestry of the Cro-Magnons deep into tropical Africa, into the territory of the hypothetical African Eve"... --Cro-Magnon:How the Ice Age Gave Birth to the First Modern Humans, By Brian Fagan,pg 89 (2010).
quote: "In modern humans, this elongation is a pattern characteristic of warm-adapted populations, and this physique may be an early Cro-Magnon retention from African ancestors. Similar retentions may be observed in certain indices of facial shape ..." --Encyclopedia of Human Evolution and Prehistory. by Eric Delson
Full development of certain haplotypes would in time, come into being outside Africa, but core "root-types" were already in place within Africa, with variable indigenous expansion and differentiation within Africa, before any migration.
"These indicate that the root of L3 gives rise to a multifurcation from a single haplotype producing a number of distinct subclades... The simplest explanation for this geographical distribution [haplogroups M and N], however, is an expansion of the root type within East Africa, where several independent L3 branches thrive, including a sister group to L3, christened L4 (Kivisild et al. 2004; Chap. 7), followed by divergence into haplogroups M and N somewhere between the Horn of Africa and the Indian subcontinent. Since neither the L3 root type nor any other descendants survive outside Africa, the root type itself must have become extinct during a period of genetic drift in the founder population as it diversified into haplogroups M and N, if the diversification was outside Africa. If on the other hand the diversification was indeed within East Africa, then Haplogroups M and N must have either been carried out of Africa in their entirety or subsequently have become extinct within Africa, with the singular exception of the derived M1." - Hans-Jürgen Bandelt et. 2006. EDS. Human Mitochondrial DNA and the Evolution of Homo sapiens.
-------------------- Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began.. Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
An Ivy league professor to boot! Is it any wonder why the cracker is such a low IQ Charlaton? Anyone reviewing Charlatan Coon's evidence based on superficial physical characteristics and outright distortion and lies has to agree That Charlatan Coon monkey sure was a brilliant man! You can tell how brilliant he was by how respected he is today by the caliber of monkey that uses him as a source in 2012 LOL
Coon was clearly a fool, a liar and a white supremacist racist, but he was right about ONE THING folks! The obvious biological differences between the cracker and true human beings! little did the fool know, that the sub species is the cracker! bwahahahaha!!!!!
The filthy, thin lipped, flat assed, stringy haired monkey now insists on talking about OUR ancestral fathers (Khoisan peoples)
You can shut the filthy wicked, low IQ monkey down quite easily by informing the reprobate that the Khoisan peoples possess ZERO% neanderthal admixture. This devil insists on talking about OUR ancestral fathers while neglecting its own zoo animals fathers, which happen to be 48 chromosome sprs (Neanderthal, Denosovan) I guess if my father was a 48 chromosome ape, Id lie and try to assume the identity of human being too! The crackers daddy is a 48 chromosome ape with some monley added in the ungodly mix too! (RH factor)
You really have to love watching this low IQ, degenerate pink assed monkley talk about cats! bwahahahaha!!!!! The filthy sub species reprobate does not even understand why I utilize the liger and Tigon in my dissection of the ape Hybrid, sub species cracker! LOL
ALL cats with the exception of some found in South Americas possess 38 chromosomes! that goes from a house cat to a Lion to a tiger. They ALL possess 38 chromosomes!
Lions and tigers share the same # of chromosomes but are two different species
Then same applies to dogs, which is another animal that these filthy monkeys love to utilize. ALL dogs from the poodle to the wolf share 78 chromsomes
Which brings us to the degenerate, filthy cracker! While it is true that these evil abominations possess 46 chromosomes... when you peep back the onion on these monmsters, you find RECENT common ancesters for these reprobates!
For example there is 48 chromosome ape Neanderthal, Denisovan)
Then you have 42 chromosome monkey (Rh factor)
and of course they also possess human DNA as well!
This MIX all happened within the last 100,000 years folks! There is absoluetl,y no question that the white man is not a true human! it is an ape hybrid and a sub species with THREE SEPERATE species of DNA running through this abominations veins
I guess if I were a low IQ pink assed monkey, Id be talking about cats too!
This enitire site except for myself is comprised of one person who has created fake names where he holds conversations with itself! There are too many of these fake names to list, because the fake names are EVERYone THAT posts here, and that includes EVERYONE except for myself of course! Some of the more prominent the fake names are 1) Mike111 2) The Lioness 3) clyde winters 4) Amun-Ra The Ultimate 5) Swenet 6) alTakruri 7) Charlie Bass 8) Doug M 9) Oshun 10) Egmond Codfried 11) Djehuti 12) Zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova 13) DHDoxies
YOU CAN LOOK AT A FEW OF THE MONKEYS FAKE WEBSITES HERE! THESE ARE JUST A FEW OF MANY THAT THIS PINK ASSED MONKEY USES TO TRY AND FOOL YOU
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: "Moving the goalposts, also known as raising the bar, is an informal logically fallacious argument in which evidence presented in response to a specific claim is dismissed and some other (often greater) evidence is demanded." - Precisely how you have shifted from morphology to a genetic definition.
No, brain-dead vegitable, your excerpt clearly mentions two roles (demanding vs presenting evidence). When I'm doing the latter (posting Coon excerpts that disagree with what you're saying), its impossible for me to be in a position of demanding evidence and arbitrarily shooting it down (i.e., moving the goalpoint). At that point in time, YOU're reviewing the Coon citation I bring to the table. LMAO. You're so low IQ, its not even funny anymore. You went out of your way to search the definition, and you still fail to not see that your bizarre interpretation of the phrase is totally off.
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: Coon's position, like mine, is that if crania shows morphological admixture, it is not homogenous.
No one in his right mind says that admixed populations are homogenous. Where you and the whole world (including Coon) differ, however, is in your retarded claim that minor negroid admixture nullifies a Mediterranean classification for the population as a whole. Coon says that Somali's are Mediterraneans, and that 20% of them display strong Negroid traits. Nowhere does he say that that makes Somali not Mediterranean as a population.
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: This is very different to the one drop rule you are setting up - that someone with distant Negroid ancestry but looks 100% Caucasoid is somehow not Caucasoid.
You're talking out of your ass, I'm not setting up anything. The purely Mediterranean Agua man belongs to a population with more than 20% strong negro admixture, according to Coon. According to you (but not Coon), this means that the population as a whole cannot be Mediterranean. Unless you're claiming that the Agau are negroes because of this minor supposedly 20% contribution, none of this has anything to do with the one drop rule, which refers to action of arbitrarily inflating a minor component of someone's ancestry, and ignoring the larger genetic component when classifying that person. Again, you're too dumb to understand the terms you're throwing around, from the one drop rule, to moving the goal post. You're just too low IQ.
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: No that's not true.
Of course it's true. Your post-Pleistocene Coonian maps, which you've posted non-stop, all show the Caucasoid coloration extending well into the Horn. Somali's as a populational average, fall into the Caucasoid range for all of the 'litmus tests' you've paraded around as the holy grail (leptorrhiny, orthochnathy, leptoprosopy) during your stay here. Additionally, you subscribe to Baker, Seligman and Sergi--none of them say that most Ethiopians are hybrids. They flat-out call them Caucasoid.
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: I claimed most Ethiopians fall intermediate between Caucasoids/Negroids
Thanks for confirming you're in total disagreement with Coon, Sergi and Baker who radically disagree with you.
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: You claimed those people are Meds, but Coon explicitly states they are not.
An oasis dweller from Kharga. This extremely dolichocephalic, low-vaulted, and relatively low-nosed Mediterranean sub-type --Coon
^Watch the fag Angho psychopathically deny that the except above states that the Kharga man is a 'Mediterranean subtype'.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: No, brain-dead vegitable, your excerpt clearly mentions two roles (demanding vs presenting evidence). When I'm doing the latter (posting Coon excerpts that disagree with what you're saying), its impossible for me to be in a position of demanding evidence and arbitrarily shooting it down (i.e., moving the goalpoint). At that point in time, YOU're reviewing the Coon citation I bring to the table. LMAO. You're so low IQ, its not even funny anymore. You went out of your way to search the definition, and you still fail to not see that your bizarre interpretation of the phrase is totally off.
You changed the criteria of race from morphology to genetics once you realised the former destroyed your position. This is moving the goalpost - radically shifting definitions and criteria of race after you were debunked (the former criteria of evidence according to you now isn't good enough - hence you've 'raised the bar'). Now that you have been exposed as a total fraud once again you've been been forced to the laughable position to claim I don't understand the fallacy. Yet anyone objective reading your posts isn't fooled. I'm not the idiot who shifts definitions and criteria once loosing.
Recap: You've gone from claiming crania with high NI's and prognathism are Mediterranean. To then retracting that morphological claim, to now employing the one drop rule (suddenly now people who look 100% Caucasoid with thin noses, orthognathism etc are hybrids).
quote:No one in his right mind says that admixed populations are homogenous.
You have. Suffering from amnesia? Or are you ashamed of your earlier posts? You're the one who has claimed throughout this thread crania showing Negroid morphological "tendencies" are Mediterranean. However recently you've now moved away from this (embarrassed?) and started using a bogus genetic definition of race (despite the fact Coon's 1939 study never used genetics).
quote:Coon says that Somali's are Mediterraneans, and that 20% of them display strong Negroid traits. Nowhere does he say that that makes Somali not Mediterranean as a population.
Nowhere does Coon claim modern Somali's are Mediterranean. God you are thick. The different ethnic castes in Somali like Ethiopia show different ranges of Hamiticization. Coon (1939) and later (1965) outlines the different ethnic groups and castes in Somaliland-Eritrea and their levels of Negroid/Caucasoid ancestry. Those that show Negroid physical admixture he does not label Mediterranean.
quote:You're talking out of your ass, I'm not setting up anything. The purely Mediterranean Agua man belongs to a population with more than 20% strong negro admixture, according to Coon. According to you (but not Coon), this means that the population as a whole cannot be Mediterranean.
Another lie (how many is that now? 50?). Coon doesn't claim that man is Mediterranean, "This type, while well-characterized today, cannot be identified with any hitherto studied skeletal Mediterranean sub-race".
What part of "cannot" don't you understand?
quote:Unless you're claiming that the Agau are negroes because of this minor supposedly 20% contribution, none of this has anything to do with the one drop rule, which refers to action of arbitrarily inflating a minor component of someone's ancestry, and ignoring the larger genetic component when classifying that person.
They are not Negroids or Caucasoids. They are a clinal population as Coon notes.
You've used the one drop rule elsewhere, specifically where you quoted Coon who asserted African x looks 100% Caucasoid, but had distant Negroid ancestry (not physically detectable) -- which is where you attempted to shift the criteria of race to genetics. That's the one drop rule by your standard not Coon - who accepted them as Caucasoids.
quote:Of course it's true. Your post-Pleistocene Coonian maps, which you've posted non-stop, all show the Caucasoid coloration extending well into the Horn.
Of course. But that map was made for 15,000 - 10,000 BC idiot. That was before Negroids arrived in the area.
quote:Somali's as a populational average, fall into the Caucasoid range for all of the 'litmus tests' you've paraded around as the holy grail (leptorrhiny, orthochnathy, leptoprosopy) during your stay here. Additionally, you subscribe to Baker, Seligman and Sergi--none of them say that most Ethiopians are hybrids. They flat-out call them Caucasoid.
Yet another lie. Baker (1974) popularised the term Aethiopid for them. Nowhere do any of those authors label them Caucasoids, excluding the high castes/certain ethnic groups.
The all Somalis/Ethiopians = Caucasoid claim is an Afrocentric fallacy you, doug and other retards set up. Its a straw man, where you try and portray race typology as stupid as possible, hence the silly thread claiming "a Caucasoid Pygmy"...
quote:Thanks for confirming you're in total agreement with Coon, Sergi and Baker who radically agree with you, but me, doug and other Afroquacks set up false views of those authors to knock down.
Edited.
quote: ^Watch the fag Angho psychopathically deny that the except above states that the Kharga man is a 'Mediterranean subtype'.
Indeed.
"This type, while well-characterized today, cannot be identified with any hitherto studied skeletal Mediterranean sub-race."
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: No, brain-dead vegitable, your excerpt clearly mentions two roles (demanding vs presenting evidence). When I'm doing the latter (posting Coon excerpts that disagree with what you're saying), its impossible for me to be in a position of demanding evidence and arbitrarily shooting it down (i.e., moving the goalpoint). At that point in time, YOU're reviewing the Coon citation I bring to the table. LMAO. You're so low IQ, its not even funny anymore. You went out of your way to search the definition, and you still fail to not see that your bizarre interpretation of the phrase is totally off.
You changed the criteria of race from morphology to genetics once you realised the former destroyed your position. This is moving the goalpost - radically shifting definitions and criteria of race after you were debunked (the former criteria of evidence according to you now isn't good enough - hence you've 'raised the bar'). Now that you have been exposed as a total fraud once again you've been been forced to the laughable position to claim I don't understand the fallacy. Yet anyone objective reading your posts isn't fooled. I'm not the idiot who shifts definitions and criteria once loosing.
Recap: You've gone from claiming crania with high NI's and prognathism are Mediterranean. To then retracting that morphological claim, to now employing the one drop rule (suddenly now people who look 100% Caucasoid with thin noses, orthognathism etc are hybrids).
quote:No one in his right mind says that admixed populations are homogenous.
You have. Suffering from amnesia? Or are you ashamed of your earlier posts? You're the one who has claimed throughout this thread crania showing Negroid morphological "tendencies" are Mediterranean. However recently you've now moved away from this (embarrassed?) and started using a bogus genetic definition of race (despite the fact Coon's 1939 study never used genetics).
quote:Coon says that Somali's are Mediterraneans, and that 20% of them display strong Negroid traits. Nowhere does he say that that makes Somali not Mediterranean as a population.
Nowhere does Coon claim modern Somali's are Mediterranean. God you are thick. The different ethnic castes in Somali like Ethiopia show different ranges of Hamiticization. Coon (1939) and later (1965) outlines the different ethnic groups and castes in Somaliland-Eritrea and their levels of Negroid/Caucasoid ancestry. Those that show Negroid physical admixture he does not label Mediterranean.
quote:You're talking out of your ass, I'm not setting up anything. The purely Mediterranean Agua man belongs to a population with more than 20% strong negro admixture, according to Coon. According to you (but not Coon), this means that the population as a whole cannot be Mediterranean.
Another lie (how many is that now? 50?). Coon doesn't claim that man is Mediterranean, "This type, while well-characterized today, cannot be identified with any hitherto studied skeletal Mediterranean sub-race".
What part of "cannot" don't you understand?
quote:Unless you're claiming that the Agau are negroes because of this minor supposedly 20% contribution, none of this has anything to do with the one drop rule, which refers to action of arbitrarily inflating a minor component of someone's ancestry, and ignoring the larger genetic component when classifying that person.
They are not Negroids or Caucasoids. They are a clinal population as Coon notes.
You've used the one drop rule elsewhere, specifically where you quoted Coon who asserted African x looks 100% Caucasoid, but had distant Negroid ancestry (not physically detectable) -- which is where you attempted to shift the criteria of race to genetics. That's the one drop rule by your standard not Coon - who accepted them as Caucasoids.
quote:Of course it's true. Your post-Pleistocene Coonian maps, which you've posted non-stop, all show the Caucasoid coloration extending well into the Horn.
Of course. But that map was made for 15,000 - 10,000 BC idiot. That was before Negroids arrived in the area.
quote:Somali's as a populational average, fall into the Caucasoid range for all of the 'litmus tests' you've paraded around as the holy grail (leptorrhiny, orthochnathy, leptoprosopy) during your stay here. Additionally, you subscribe to Baker, Seligman and Sergi--none of them say that most Ethiopians are hybrids. They flat-out call them Caucasoid.
Yet another lie. Baker (1974) popularised the term Aethiopid for them. Nowhere do any of those authors label them Caucasoids, excluding the high castes/certain ethnic groups.
The all Somalis/Ethiopians = Caucasoid claim is an Afrocentric fallacy you, doug and other retards set up. Its a straw man, where you try and portray race typology as stupid as possible, hence the silly thread claiming "a Caucasoid Pygmy"...
quote:Thanks for confirming you're in total agreement with Coon, Sergi and Baker who radically agree with you, but me, doug and other Afroquacks set up false views of those authors to knock down.
Edited.
quote: ^Watch the fag Angho psychopathically deny that the except above states that the Kharga man is a 'Mediterranean subtype'.
Indeed.
"This type, while well-characterized today, cannot be identified with any hitherto studied skeletal Mediterranean sub-race."
Posts: 22244 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: You changed the criteria of race from morphology to genetics once you realised the former destroyed your position.
Even if I did this (and I didn't), it STILL doesn't mean moving the goalpost. You can keep repeating that it does, but as long as you can't show where I unfairly and suddenly changed my demands for evidence because you posted evidence that met my earlier demands, you're just talking out of your ass.
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: Recap: You've gone from claiming crania with high NI's and prognathism are Mediterranean. To then retracting that morphological claim, to now employing the one drop rule.
Talking out of your ass again. I never stopped claiming that Chamla's proto-mediterraneans included broad nosed Muhaad 5, or that Naqadans, for example, were Mediterraneans, and broad nosed, according to Coon. As usual, you're seeing things that aren't there. You're totally out of touch with reality. You don't even know the difference between temporarily refuting something using a different set of evidence (genetics) vs having abandoned a position. Your low IQ is showing.
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: You have. Suffering from amnesia? Or are you ashamed of your earlier posts?
Show me where I even used the word 'homogenous' in this thread. Phucking liar.
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: You're the one who has claimed throughout this thread crania showing Negroid morphological "tendencies" are Mediterranean
Another point where Coon totally disagrees with you:
Actually, there is no evidence to show among them a greater negroid tendency than is commonly found among many living Europeans of Mediterranean extraction --Coon
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: Coon (1939) and later (1965) outlines the different ethnic groups and castes in Somaliland-Eritrea and their levels of Negroid/Caucasoid ancestry.
Coon and all the other authors you cite are still in disagreement with you. Nowhere do they say that most Ethiopians are intermediate between Negroids and Europeans.
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: Coon doesn't claim that man is Mediterranean, "This type, while well-characterized today, cannot be identified with any hitherto studied skeletal Mediterranean sub-race".
You're too dumb to understand that this excerpt is to be understood as that they were their own subtype within the wider Mediterranean group. Especially since he calls them a Mediterranean sub type elsewhere. Notice also that Coon said 'hitherto', indicating that he knew that later Mediterranean series might show closer links with them. Hence, his statement isn't even definitive, which precludes interpreting it the way you do, dumbass.
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: which is where you attempted to shift the criteria of race to genetics. That's the one drop rule by your standard
So, let me make sure the above is really as retarded as I think it is. According to you, shifting the criteria of race to genetics is the same as using the one drop rule?
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: That's the one drop rule by your standard not Coon - who accepted them as Caucasoids.
LMAO. You're just going to keep digging your own grave, aren't you? First you say that they're a clinal population according the Coon. You've also said that most Ethiopians aren't Caucasoid, but hybrids. This is in clear violation with Coon who says that only a minority of ~20% fit this description.
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: Of course. But that map was made for 15,000 - 10,000 BC idiot. That was before Negroids arrived in the area.
Again, you're lying out of your ass. Only one of the two maps show Caucasoids in the Horn, and that map is not the 15.000-10.000 map. In fact, you've totally made up those dates. The pleistocene map is not depicting conditions from 15.000-10.000bc.
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: Baker (1974) popularised the term Aethiopid for them. Nowhere do any of those authors label them Caucasoids, excluding the high castes/certain ethnic groups.
Semantics. According to Baker, Ethiopids were part of the larger Europid group. Baker is clearly in disagreement with you, as are Coon, Sergi, Seligman and all the other authors you cite.
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: The all Somalis/Ethiopians = Caucasoid claim is an Afrocentric fallacy you
The fact that you're telling that to the person who posted Coon's view that 20% of Somali's are strongly Negroid shows how retarded you are.
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: Of course. But that map was made for 15,000 - 10,000 BC idiot. That was before Negroids arrived in the area.
LMAO. See what I wrote above regarding Coon's maps. You've totally fabricated those dates, and Coon only places Caucasoids in the Horn in the Holocene, not in the pleistocene.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Coon's Pleistocene map, the original 2 "races" of Africa Congoid (yellow) Khoisan ( Capoid) ( purple)
Coon, after the Pleistocene, add Caucasoid (green) Mongoloid (blue) Austrailoid (red) Redrawing of a map from en:Carleton S. Coon, The Origin of Races (1962), p. 108-109. (unverified). Distribution of Coon's "five races" after the end of the Pleistocene. This is the second half of the combination of two maps numbered "Map 13", labelled "Pleistocene" and "Early Post-Pleistocene". Original caption:
"This schematic map shows the distribution of the five subspecies of Homo during most of the Pleistocene, from 500,000 to 10,000 years ago. This distribution matches that on the diagram in Chapter 1. Of the five subspecies, the Congoid was the most isolated; it was in contact with only one other, the Capoid, then resident in North Africa. The second map shows what happened at the end of the Pleistocene, when the Mongoloids and Caucasoids expanded and burst out of their territories. The Mongoloids entered and inhabited America, and extended their domain southward into Southeast Asia and Indonesia, while the Australoids crossed Wallace's Line and occupied Australia and New Guinea. The Caucasoids thrust northward. More significantly, they drove the Capoids out of North Africa and occupied the White Highlands of Kenya and Tanganyika. The Congoids were reduced to a small part of their earlier domain, including the Congo forests and the lands to the north, where they later evolved rapidly and spread, as Negroes, over much of Africa."
The term White Highlands describes an area in the central uplands of Kenya, so-called because, during the period of British Colonialism, European or white immigrants settled there in considerable numbers. They were attracted to the good soils and growing conditions, as well as the cool climate.
_______________________________________________
you know what's also weird about this map? If you look at the Khosians supposedly originally in North Africa, they get pushed out by Caucasians. But who is south of the Khosians? The "Congoids" So they pass clear through the whole Congoid part of Africa and only decided to push out the Congoid when the reach South Africa all the way on the other side of the continent and settle there, Coon's a loon. Also he's got marked in pruple here, after the Pleiostine, Khoisans lumped together with Nilotes or others all the way up to Tanzania, Kenya
Posts: 42939 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
You really have to love watching this low IQ, degenerate pink assed monkley talk
This enitire site except for myself is comprised of one person who has created fake names where he holds conversations with itself! There are too many of these fake names to list, because the fake names are EVERYone THAT posts here, and that includes EVERYONE except for myself of course! Some of the more prominent the fake names are 1) Mike111 2) The Lioness 3) clyde winters 4) Amun-Ra The Ultimate 5) Swenet 6) alTakruri 7) Charlie Bass 8) Doug M 9) Oshun 10) Egmond Codfried 11) Djehuti 12) Zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova 13) DHDoxies
YOU CAN LOOK AT A FEW OF THE MONKEYS FAKE WEBSITES HERE! THESE ARE JUST A FEW OF MANY THAT THIS PINK ASSED MONKEY USES TO TRY AND FOOL YOU
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Even if I did this (and I didn't), it STILL doesn't mean moving the goalpost. You can keep repeating that it does, but as long as you can't show where I unfairly and suddenly changed my demands for evidence because you posted evidence that met my earlier demands, you're just talking out of your ass.
You shifted the evidence from morphology to genetics. One only has to look a few posts back to see this. You made the shift because you couldn't find anywhere where Coon labels crania with high NI's Mediterraneans taxonomically. Instead he always asserted such are admixed or show other racial "tendencies". Once you realised you couldn't get round this, you changed the criteria of race to genetics.
quote:Show me where I even used the word 'homogenous' in this thread. Phucking liar.
I stated you asserted crania with broad traits are Mediterranean. Are you now denying this? That position wasn't Coon's, who was predominantly a race typologist. He never lumped Negroid admixed crania in with Caucasoids. No one does. Composite races, he went through great pains to label as seperate taxons, hence he didn't consider African Americans to be Negroid. That's why you are completely wrong, and so stupid to try and twist his views to infer he considered crania that looks Negroid, or Negroid admixed to be Caucasoid. You simply have no idea about Coon or his views. Like Doug and the other Afroloons all you can do is straw man or distort race realist literature.
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: You're the one who has claimed throughout this thread crania showing Negroid morphological "tendencies" are MediterraneanAnother point where Coon totally disagrees with you:
Actually, there is no evidence to show among them a greater negroid tendency than is commonly found among many living Europeans of Mediterranean extraction --Coon
Wrong. Page 62, the preceeding page, Coon clarifies these are the Natufians. This is the only population Coon (1939) discusses with Negroid "tendencies"/admixture in Europeans (elsewhere he discusses admixed Africans), not the entire Mediterranean (Proper) taxon:
"Type already met in Portugal and Palestine in Late Mesolithic. Represents the paedomorphic or sexually undifferentiated Mediterranean form, and often carries a slight negroid tendency."
The bold you always cut off to distort Coon's position. As he clarifies on page 62, only the Natufians show "Negroid tendencies". This was a view he retracted in 1962. So not only are you distorting Coon's views, you're distorting views that was retracted 50 years ago.
quote:Coon and all the other authors you cite are still in disagreement with you. Nowhere do they say that most Ethiopians are intermediate between Negroids and Europeans.
No they aren't:
"Similarly, the Ethiopids of Ethiopia and elsewhere (Galla and other tribes) are almost certainly hybrids between Europids with some Negrid admixture" (Baker, 1974).
"Aethiopids [...] It is not possible to state with confidence which Europid subrace was chiefly reponsible for the non-Negrid contributions to this hybrid taxon" (Baker, 1974)
"Today the indigenous population of Africa is mostly clinal. In the Sudan and East Africa, Caucasoids shade into Negroes" (Coon, 1965)
"The peoples of Africa as a whole, may be divided into the North African Caucasoids, the mixed peoples of Ethiopia and the East African highlands and the Pygmies, Negroes, the Bushmen, and the Hottentots." (Coon, 1965)
Note the latter quote, he's generalizing as a whole. Most Ethiopians and Somalis are Aethiopid, meaning Caucasoid-Negroid interracial clinal (excluding the few higher caste Caucasoids). Precisely what I have stated.
- All you can do is distort the literature, because you don't own their works and like an idiot are just picking out quotes online to twist. You have been exposed again and again as a liar. Despite all the quotes above showing how wrong you are, out of ignorance and denial you will come back *somehow* asserting I am wrong.
quote: You've totally fabricated those dates, and Coon only places Caucasoids in the Horn in the Holocene, not in the pleistocene.
Those dates are found throughout his literature: 12,200 BC for the first Caucasoid arrival (Coon, 1965), "before the Pleistocene was over, north-west Africa was invaded by Caucasoids" (Coon, 1962) but "not long before 10,000 BC" (Ibid.). Association with the proto-Caspians - who were thin nosed, orthognathic and narrow faced.
Coon dates the Caucasoid arrival into Africa from 15,000 - 10,000 BC. Figures between those dates are found throughout his works. His earlier dating of up to 20k (1939) was retracted. The Mouillian who he once regarded as Caucasoids, by 1965 he claimed were not. Precisely my position. The Mouillian remains are wide nosed, with alveolar prognathism. They aren't Caucasoid. Although some like to claim they are "robust Caucasoids", but they are working from the OOA hypothesis.
Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote: "Despite the numerous studies proposing early human population expansions from Africa into Arabia during the Late Pleistocene, no archaeological sites have yet been discovered in Arabia that resemble a specific African industry, which would indicate demographic exchange across the Red Sea. Here we report the discovery of a buried site and more than 100 new surface scatters in the Dhofar region of Oman belonging to a regionally-specific African lithic industry - the late Nubian Complex - known previously only from the northeast and Horn of Africa during Marine Isotope Stage 5,~1128,000 to 74,000 years ago. Two optically stimulated luminescence age estimates from the open-air site of Aybut Al Auwal in Oman place the Arabian Nubian Complex at ~106,000 years ago, providing archaeological evidence for the presence of a distinct northeast African Middle Stone Age technocomplex in southern Arabia sometime in the first half of Marine Isotope Stage 5."
--Jeffrey I. Rose et al
quote:"The method of manufacture of the Jubbah industries differs from the more distinctive techniques described in the extreme southern zones of Arabia, including the Nubian technocomplex in Oman [20] and the production of flakes and blades from flat debitage surfaces at SD-1 in Yemen [22]. Rose et al.[20] have argued that the presence of Nubian core methods in Oman are directly tied to the presence of Homo sapiens in Arabia in MIS 5, whereas Delagnes et al.[22] have argued that the MIS 3 blade and point dominated assemblages in Yemen are broadly reminiscent of techniques that Neanderthals were using in the Levant. The unidirectional convergent technique practiced at JKF-1 and the presence of Levallois points shares some similarities with assemblages in the Levant. Yet, the recovery of a retouched point at JQ-1 and two bifacial pieces at JSM-1 tentatively suggest an affinity with the African Middle Stone Age as opposed to the Levant, where such tool types are absent. Distinctive foliate bifaces, which are present in Africa and southern Arabia, are so far unknown at Jubbah and in northern Arabia."
--Michael D. Petraglia et al.
quote:"Particularly, Yemen has the largest contribution of L lineages (30). So, most probably, this area was the entrance gate of a portion of these lineages in prehistoric times, which participated in the building of the primitive Arabian population."
--Khaled K Abu-Amero et al.
quote:"Systematic survey by the Abydos Survey for Paleolithic Sites project has recorded Nubian Complex artifact density, distribution, typology, and technology across the high desert landscape west of the Nile Valley in Middle Egypt. Our work contrasts with previous investigations of Nubian Complex settlement systems in Egypt, which focused on a small number of sites in the terraces of the Nile Valley, the desert oases, and the Red Sea Mountains. Earlier research interpreted the Nubian Complex, in particular, as a radiating settlement system that incorporated a specialized point production. Our high desert data, however, indicate that the Nubian Complex associated with early modern humans in this region of the high desert reflects a circulating, rather than a radiating, settlement system, and that point production has been over-emphasized. Data available from our work, as well as sites investigated by others, do not conclusively identify Nubian Complex behavioral strategies as modern."
"These data, however, do contribute to the understanding of landscape use by early modern human populations living along the Nile Valley Corridor route out of Africa."
--Deborah I. Olszewskia et al.
quote:Migrations into India “did occur, but rarely from western Eurasian populations.” There are low frequencies of the western Eurasian mtDNA types in both southern and northern India. Thus, the ‘caucasoid’ features of south Asians may best be considered ‘pre-caucasoid’— that is, part of a diverse north or north-east African gene pool that yielded separate origins for western Eurasian and southern Asian populations over 50,000 years ago.
- U.S. biological anthropologist Todd R. Disotell.
Posts: 22244 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: You shifted the evidence from morphology to genetics. One only has to look a few posts back to see this
Thanks for silently admitting that you fabricated your claim that I was 'moving the goalpost'. This is, of couse, just one fabrication in a long line of blunders on your part.
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: You made the shift because you couldn't find anywhere where Coon labels crania with high NI's Mediterraneans taxonomically.
Again, totally fabricated. I introduced the Agau genetic argument on thread page 15, on november the 30th, and I was still talking about negroid tendencies in Mediterranean remains on December the 2nd and December the 3rd, only to have you fabricate, on November the 3rd, that I abandoned the morphological argument in favor of a genetic one. You're clearly mentally ill to be misconstruing reality like that.
quote:Wrong. Page 62, the preceeding page, Coon clarifies these are the Natufians.
You're such a pathethic lying ass faggot. Your fabrications have reached an unprecedented new low. How exactly do Natufians qualify for this description: ''many living Europeans of Mediterranean extraction''? Do they qualify for the 'living' expect? Do they qualify for the 'European' aspect? Fill me in, psycho.
quote:This is the only population Coon (1939) discusses with Negroid "tendencies"/admixture in Europeans
And then, in a manner that is typical of your long record of telling outright lies, you attempt to prove your claim that only Natufian Meds had minor negroid affinities, by posting an excerpt which says that Natufians were, in fact, NOT the only ones with the described minor Negroid tendency. Aside from being a pathological liar, you clearly also have a reading comprehension problem.
quote:not the entire Mediterranean (Proper) taxon
Totally fabricated strawman argument. The Coonian citation, and I myself, have always claimed that such Negroid traits were considered normal for Mediterraneans, according to Coon.
quote:The bold you always cut off to distort Coon's position. As he clarifies on page 62, only the Natufians show "Negroid tendencies".
Prove that Coon says this on p62. **Note how the faggot Faheemdunkers will act like I never asked him this, and how he will skip the request**.
quote:This was a view he retracted in 1962. So not only are you distorting Coon's views, you're distorting views that was retracted 50 years ago.
Coon didn't retract anything. The Shuqbah Natufians are in an area which is depicted by him as Caucasoid in 1939, and he repeats in 1962 that they're Caucasoid. That you think this represents a retraction, is further evidence of your mental retardation, and your habit of fabricating data.
quote:No they aren't:
Again, your sources all conflict with your claims. For instance, Baker says that Ethiopids are hybrids, with ''some'' negrid admixture. Nowhere even close to what your claiming, namely, that most Ethiopians have Negroid admixture, and placed in between Caucasoids and Negroids. Your Coon quotes don't go against the ones I cited earlier where he says only 20% are strongly Negroid. Your silence on Seligman and Sergi on this issue speaks parts. You can't find a citation where they claim that most Cushitic speaking horners are morpholigically in between Negroids and Caucasoids, and you know it.
quote:Those dates are found throughout his literature
Translation, I totally phucked up in fabricating claims in regards to the 1939 maps.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
Totally fabricated strawman argument. The Coonian citation, and I myself, have always claimed that such Negroid traits were considered normal for **some** Mediterranean groups, according to Coon.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Your finished. You can only now respond with mostly one liners.
You claimed Coon and Baker asserted Ethiopians were Caucasoid or a Europid subrace. These claims are false:
"Similarly, the Ethiopids of Ethiopia and elsewhere (Galla and other tribes) are almost certainly hybrids between Europids with some Negrid admixture" (Baker, 1974).
"Aethiopids [...] It is not possible to state with confidence which Europid subrace was chiefly reponsible for the non-Negrid contributions to this hybrid taxon" (Baker, 1974)
"Today the indigenous population of Africa is mostly clinal. In the Sudan and East Africa, Caucasoids shade into Negroes" (Coon, 1965)
"The peoples of Africa as a whole, may be divided into the North African Caucasoids, the mixed peoples of Ethiopia and the East African highlands and the Pygmies, Negroes, the Bushmen, and the Hottentots." (Coon, 1965)
Aethiopids are a hybrid taxon.
Coon and Baker's position was precisely what I have posted. Once you lost this argument you've now shifted to try and assert they didn't consider them "intermediates" - a desperate attempt to save yourself through semantics. As a whole though they did (as the above quotes show), but as i've noted different castes and ethnic groups show different degrees of Hamiticization. In fact Coon notes this in his 1939 study. Seligman's position was that most Ethiopians are also "mixed with Negroes" (Seligman, 1957). All these authors regarded the Ethiopians as a whole to be a hybrid taxon or interracial cline, falling in-between Caucasoids and Negroids as a whole. The same is found in Hooton (1946) who Coon studied under: "The most of the Horn of Africa is occuped by mixed Negroid peoples sometimes signified by the name of the "Ethiopian race". All of these quotes refute your earlier position that these were Caucasoid, when they are hybrids.
You first claimed these authors lumped all these populations under Caucasoids/Europids. Now you've retracted that, and are now arguing they are mixed, just not "intermediate". A sudden 180 degrees turn in views. You will continue to change your position once you know your former views can not be defended - that's all you've done through this thread from shifting to morphology to genetics to now changing your stance on what these anthropologists believed.
quote:Translation, I totally phucked up in fabricating claims in regards to the 1939 maps.
Those maps weren't in Coon's Races of Europe. You don't know the slightest thing about these works, or what they are saying. All you are doing is using google searches to try and distort them. Hence you're in the same boat as Crimson Guard who also distorts them and doesn't even know their publication history. I've also shown how the Afrocentrics on this forum have used the misquotes and distortion from CG. So don't try to pretend in your spare time you read up on Coon. You've used a false source and are continuing to spread lies about Coon across the internet.
quote:Prove that Coon says this on p62.
I've already provided the quote three times. On page 62, and only on that page -- does Coon discuss the origin of Negroid "tendencies". While elsewhere he discusses this, he is only meaning this page - in regards to the Natufians (as clarified in the definition of Med Propers - the sentence you always cut off). On that page he discusses the origin of these traits in Mediterraneans. A view he retracted by 1962. Coon maintained Natufians were ancestral to most European Meds, that's why he used the term "living europeans". Again you show you haven't read the chapter and don't have a clue what you are posting.
Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
Not at all. YOU are finished. I've never had to concede to any of my views in this thread. This debate, or rather, all your debates with me, inevitable lead up to you walking away from more and more of your originally held claims, until there is nothing left for you to reply selectively to. This is the point at which you, without exception, either stop replying to the person you're debating, or where you typically open a new can of worms, totally unrelated to the topic at hand, to hide the fact that you got your ass handed to you.
quote:You claimed Coon and Baker asserted Ethiopians were Caucasoid or a Europid subrace. These claims are false
"Similarly, the Ethiopids of Ethiopia and elsewhere (Galla and other tribes) are almost certainly hybrids between Europids with some Negrid admixture" (Baker, 1974).
Pathological liar, any specific reason why your OBVIOUSLY MANIPULATED Baker quote not only has zero hits on the internet, but also falsely states ''are almost certainly hybrids'', at the exact location where its supposed to say ''essentially Europid''?
The Aethiopids ('Eastern Hamites' or 'Erythriotes') of Ethiopia and Somaliland are an essentially Europid subrace with some Negrid admixture. --Baker
A phuckin fraud is what you are. Willfully denying reality and mentally giving your own spin on straight-forward information is something you should be slapped for in the teeth, but giving your own spin and manipulating sources by replacing certain words that you don't like and pretending the author wrote your replacements, puts you among the lowest scum (academic) fora have ever seen.
quote:Aethiopids are a hybrid taxon.
The hybrid part obviously refers to the different Europid strains (Arab, Mediterranean, Armenian) Baker saw as participating in the make up of Cushitic speaking Horners. Again, you're too phucking low IQ to understand that ''some Negrid admixture'' can't turn a population into a ''hybrid taxon''.
quote:You first claimed these authors lumped all these populations under Caucasoids/Europids.
Another fabrication. You're lying out of your ass as usual. I clearly restricted that comment to Seligman, Baker and Sergi, and I still stand by that comment. You're so desperate to catch me slipping. From the 'moving the goalpost' fiasco, to the imaginary 'shift from morphology to genetics' blunder. Your low IQ has you seeing things.
quote:Now you've retracted that, and are now arguing they are mixed, just not "intermediate".
Me saying they have a minority foreign component is not inconsistent with me saying they're still considered Caucasoid, as a populational whole. I've already told you this a thousand times, but your low IQ ass always responds by telling me that minor foreign features by definition nullify a certain classification. It is clear that almost all the authors you cite disagree with this, as can be seen by the fact that the distribution of blond hair (a trait that traces back to a single mutation, meaning, it gained its current distribution by admixture) has no implications for the Caucasoid sub-types who aren't supposed to have light hair and eyes (e.g., Mediterraneans). Baker explicitly states that Ethiopid admixture in Bantu speakers has no implications for their 'Negrid' classification. Coon also explicitly states that miscegenation with freed African slaves ''had no appreciable effect on the racial position of the country''. Like I said, not one, not two, literally ALL your sources disagree with you.
quote:On page 62, and only on that page -- does Coon discuss the origin of Negroid "tendencies".
False. All he does on p62 is describing the two types of Natufian. So again, where on p62 does Coon inform us that the tendency of certain Meds to have 'minor negroid affinity', traces back to Natufians?
quote:A view he retracted by 1962.
Aside from the fact that this is yet another example of the fact that you don't comprehend what you read (''Natufians are Caucasoid'' is not a retraction), your fabricated claim is also predicated on your fabricated assumption that Coon didn't consider them Caucasoid in the first place, hence, your low IQ reasoning that any Coon statement down the road that they are, must represent a retraction.
quote:Coon maintained Natufians were ancestral to most European Meds
Prove that Coon 1939 stated that Natufians were ancestral to most European Meds.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
The quote appears on page 12. The quote you have put up is a seperate quotation, found on page 225. On page 12, Baker remarks:
"Similarly, the Aethiopids of Ethiopia and elsewhere (Galla and other tribes) are almost certainly hybrids between Europids with some Negrid admixture, but certain authorities regard them as Negrids with Europid admixture."
I've manipulated nothing. I merely ommissed the single "A" from Ethiopid (however both terms refer to the same taxon). Baker (1974) regarded Aethiopids to be an interracial clinal population (like Coon and Seligman) between Caucasoids and Negrids (Negroids).
quote:According to Baker, Ethiopids were part of the larger Europid group. Baker is clearly in disagreement with you, as are Coon, Sergi, Seligman.
Yet, nowhere does Baker cluster the composite/hybrid Aethiopids as Europids/a Europid subrace. In fact the quote you cite (page 225) covers Aethiopids under "hybrid populations" (alongside the Turanids). Don't embarrass yourself further.
You don't own these texts and all you are doing is twisting passages you find off google searches. Since you don't have all the text available all you can do is distort passages without grasping the context. As shown above you try to claim Baker (1974) lumps Aethiopids with Europids, despite the fact in his work he dedicates his time claiming they are a hybrid taxon, and stresses their Negrid admixture.
What you don't also seem to understand is that clinal or hybrid populations are lumped by these authors with other taxons - for convenience, but not taxonomically (Baker throughout his work notes that Aethiopids are a hybrid and seperate taxon). If a population is created through two subspecies interbreeding, the result belongs to neither taxon. Yet given enough generations more traits of either subspecies will manifest. This is the old lumper vs splitter debate. AA's are Negroid-Caucasoid admixed, but more of the former. Should they be labeled as Negroes? No one has ever resolved this problem with race crossing. And it was in fact for this reason that Baker in an objective article (1977) called to halt interracialism, purely on the grounds from a scientific perspective it causes taxonomic problems.
Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: AA's are Negroid-Caucasoid admixed, but more of the former. Should they be labeled as Negroes? No one has ever resolved this problem with race crossing. And it was in fact for this reason that Baker in an objective article (1977) called to halt interracialism, purely on the grounds from a scientific perspective it causes taxonomic problems. [/QB]
quote:Me saying they have a minority foreign component is not inconsistent with me saying they're still considered Caucasoid, as a populational whole. I've already told you this a thousand times, but your low IQ ass always responds by telling me that minor foreign features by definition nullify a certain classification. It is clear that almost all the authors you cite disagree with this.
You couldn't be more wrong. Both Coon and Baker were stronger typologists than populationists. Typologists do not look at population wholes, but individuals. These individuals are then identified as races ("types") based on their phenotypical traits. Ironically, Badumtish whose race denial stresses individualism - is the most opposed to race typology.
"For the typologist, the type (eidos) is real and the variation an illusion, while for the populationist the type (average) is an abstraction and only the variation is real." (Mayr, 1997)
Coon and Baker were not populationists.
Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
Swenet is probably right that you are some low-IQ loser. Either that, or you're simply deranged and in need of psychiatric help. Posts: 26286 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Me saying they have a minority foreign component is not inconsistent with me saying they're still considered Caucasoid, as a populational whole. I've already told you this a thousand times, but your low IQ ass always responds by telling me that minor foreign features by definition nullify a certain classification. It is clear that almost all the authors you cite disagree with this.
You couldn't be more wrong. Both Coon and Baker were stronger typologists than populationists. Typologists do not look at population wholes, but individuals. These individuals are then identified as races ("types") based on their phenotypical traits. Ironically, Badumtish whose race denial stresses individualism - is the most opposed to race typology.
"For the typologist, the type (eidos) is real and the variation an illusion, while for the populationist the type (average) is an abstraction and only the variation is real." (Mayr, 1997)
Coon and Baker were not populationists.
LOL
Posts: 22244 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Crimson Guard then stumbles: "See, thats the problem with the terms and authors that used them. Your better off sticking to Coon who just used Congoids and Capoids. Judging from the pictures I showed above, you do resemble the Paleo-Negroid type more than the Sudanid. But even to them authors, the Paleo-Negroid was primarily Bantu peoples mixed with other types like the Sudanid(standard Negrid)."
Another revealing comment from CG who exposes himself again as a fake account, you can go through his comments for years and years and see the errors. Palaeo-Negrids are not associated with Bantus. The palaeo-Negrids are Forest Negroes. The subtype associated with Bantu is largely Kafrid. CG pretends to "book collect Coon" yet distorts his views, misquotes his literature (remember the whole Fulani affair) and just gets about everything else wrong.
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: The quote appears on page 12. The quote you have put up is a seperate quotation, found on page 225. On page 12, Baker remarks:
Fair's fair. You're right, after getting my hands on a copy and looking it up, it does appear to be on p12, so I take it back. Now, let's get back to the nitty gritty, now that the playing field is leveled and I too, have a copy of Baker (1974).
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: Yet, nowhere does Baker cluster the composite/hybrid Aethiopids as Europids/a Europid subrace.
^That's what Faheemdunkers says. What Baker actually says:
Hybrid populations may originate not only by intersubracial, but also by interracial miscegenation. An interracial hybrid population may give rise to a recognizable new ethnic taxon by intermarriage within itself, generation after generation. Such taxa generally (but not always) originate where the natural habitats of two races abut on one another, and therefore only two ancestral races are concerned. One of these has usually provided the majority of the hybrids. As a result the latter are commonly regarded by anthropologists as belonging to the predominant race, and as constituting a somewhat aberrant subrace of it.] --Baker (1974:p225)
and
Europids have participated in the production of several interracial hybrid taxa to which their contribution has been predominant, so that the hybrids are grouped within the Europid race --Baker (1974:p225)
quote:What you don't also seem to understand is that clinal or hybrid populations are lumped by these authors with other taxons - for convenience, but not taxonomically
When Coon says that broad nosed Natufians are a bit Negroid, but still Mediterranean, you say that Coon never said they were Mediterranean. When Coon says Badarians look a bit Negroid, but still Mediterranean, you again, repeat like a chicken without a head, that Coon didn't say that they were Mediterranean. All on the strength of your own fabricated assumption that the transfer of exotic traits by definition nullify a racial type, according to your sources. Now you do a flip flop, and instead of going against Coon's and Baker's teachings by denying the existence of passages where the above groups are classified as Mediterraneans/Europids, you admit that you were lying all those times when you said those populations were never classified as Mediterraneans. Your new position is that such classifications are out of convenience. Let's see below what implications this flip flopping concession will have on your other ideas.
quote:If a population is created through two subspecies interbreeding, the result belongs to neither taxon.
This is what happenes when you apply your reasoning to Europe:
^It means there is no such thing as a European Mediterranean, and that real Mediterraneans are to be found in large portions of the Middle East and North Africa. It means that European Mediterraneans are only classified as such for convenience. Now what?
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:On page 62, and only on that page -- does Coon discuss the origin of Negroid "tendencies".
False. All he does on p62 is describing the two types of Natufian. So again, where on p62 does Coon inform us that the tendency of certain Meds to have 'minor negroid affinity', traces back to Natufians?
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Coon maintained Natufians were ancestral to most European Meds
Prove that Coon 1939 stated that Natufians were ancestral to most European Meds.
^Stop running away from these two questions.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Swenet the white man has captured your time
you think you're doing a good deed, following around a white supremacist in high detail for 18 pages in a coversation that by design has no end?
Posts: 42939 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ But on the contrary, instead of Swenet being led by the nose by white supremacist retards, he merely allows them to expose their stupidity to the world, while he exposes his intelligence which refutes them. Fartheadbonkers is a puny puppet that dances for our whims with his pants down his ankles. That is all.
Although I for one would rather discuss more pertinent issues of ancient Egyptian and African history. Posts: 26286 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Swenet the white man has captured your time
you think you're doing a good deed, following around a white supremacist in high detail for 18 pages in a coversation that by design has no end?
In a way you're right, faheem stole Swenet's precious time.
But at the same time Swenet has enlightened others on the crap faheem promotes.
Posts: 22244 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ever since that swine got here, all he did was come into our threads and spout his pseudo-science. He keeps on doing it because no one has held his ass to the fire to the point of embarrassing him, and drilling it down his skull. Sure, refutations have taken place here and there, but rarely anything that has made him backtrack and fall back as much as he has here. It's either this or I'm going to have to hear his fabrications and contradictions for the rest of my stay here.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
But at the same time Swenet has enlightened others on the crap faheem promotes.
assumption
18 pages is necessary?
it's carrot and stick [/QB]
You sound surprisingly self-rightious after having led Mindovermatter on to debate you on something as simple to understand as (tropical) limb proportions in a discussion that had a similar length. There are many other threads which you dragged on just as long. You're just mad you're not the center of attention. BTW, if you subtract the asswhoopings Angho' was subjected to at the hands of Badumtish, it's not that long. I wouldn't be surprised if they exchanged more posts than Faheem and I did.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic