Page 16 of 16 FirstFirst ... 6141516
Results 151 to 160 of 160

Thread: 2018 Ancient Egyptian mummy genomes - Heavily Critique

  1. #151
    Quote Originally Posted by jonahst View Post
    So, to summarize, your biological argument is mostly based on craniometry and limb proportions, two anthropological fields that might be very useful and informative in many circumstances, but have proved to yield misleading or blatantly false results/conclusions with the introduction of ancient DNA.
    Incorrect! The science of physical anthropology has a major place in this discussion, as per the leading authority on the matter (at least according to Nat Geo) S.O.Y Keita;



    He explains within the first two minutes that biological evidence (which includes genetics and physical anthropology) respectively will not paint a narrative of a region's population history alone.

    It's no wonder that a large portion of your quotes are late 19th and early 20th century.
    Yet you appear have no contemporary information directly relevant to the information presented by those sources.

    How exactly could these physical attributes "never change?"
    What is meant by that is that is that this "Negroid" skull from Kerma:



    will not suddenly cease to represent a person with external anatomical features within the range of modern "Niger-Congo speakers"/black African variant, because he is later genetically tested to belong to haplogroup R. The later genetic testing will not change his phenetic affinities based on craniometric measurements with his neighboring African populations. You people act like the affiliation will suddenly make this black African "Caucasoid". Baseless leaps and bounds based entirely on social=political constructs.

    If that were the case and assuming we're all descended from Africans, wouldn't all humans have these same traits?
    You are a subset of a subset of African diversity. Non Africans are essentially the "mutants" of a branch of Northeast Africans;


    The fact that you claim Natufians were "black Africans" based on such metrics again only demonstrates the pitfalls of your evidence.
    A haplogroup designation...does not determine your race. YOUR PHYSICAL SKELETON is what constitutes a "race". Based on the phsyical skeletal remains of the Natufians they were black African migrants;



    See they would be considered "black" in classic Western civilization based on their external anatomical features. You are really to create an artificial relationship from a connection that you previously did not know of, with people who you would not associate with through your natural social behaviors. It's lunacy. So until the DNA came out, was there ever a moment where you people stopped and accepted the main science of the day as it pertains to this....that's highly doubtful.

    Your examples of artistic similarities are the definition of cherry picking. Most Nok or Dahomey art doesn't even remotely resemble ancient Egyptian art.
    You are doing desperate trolling now. I explained the emphasis of the comparison s in my last post to you, and the correlation is apparently too powerful for you to acknowledge. Those "cherry picked" "similarities" that you are claiming are not there were brought to my attention by the Metmuseum on their website a few years back, which is further validation that lack comprehension skills (purposely or helplessly).

    And even if there was some degree of cultural transfer/diffusion over the course of thousands of years, that doesn't say much about the genetics/ancestry.
    At this point the evidence has been provided, and it proves your naysaying to be false. You either lack comprehension skills willfully or helplessly.



    This doesn't reflect a direct connection and, in fact, similar arguments have been made to claim connections between ancient Mesoamerica and ancient Egypt or Mesopotamia.
    I very much believe that the ancient Egypto-Nubians migrated to the Americas on top of more ancient African populations;

    HLA in Uros from Peru Titikaka Lake: Tiwanaku, Easter and Pacific Islanders.
    Hum Immunol. 2018 Nov 13.

    "Uros people live in floating reed islands in Titikaka Lake in front of Puno town (Peru). They could have started Tiwanaku culture and shared genes and culture with Pacific Islanders; it is particularly relevant the giant hat covered men statues found in both Tiwanaku at Titikaka Lake shore and Easter Island (3700 km far from Chile in Pacific Ocean). These giants monoliths are very similar one another and unique in America and Pacific Islands. The following HLA alleles are shared in a specifically high frequency between Uros and Pacific Islanders : HLA-A*24:02, HLA-B*35:05, HLA-B*48:01, HLA-DRB1*04:03, HLA-DRB1*08:02 and HLA-DRB1*09:01. Uros also have 3 unique HLA haplotypes: A*24:02-B*15:04 - DRB1*14:02-DQB1*03:01, A*68:01:02-B*35:05-DRB1*04:03-DQB1*03:02, A*24:02-B*48:01-DRB1*04:03-DQB1*03:02. Also Uros seem to be one of the most ancient population in Titikaka Lake that could have started Tiwanaku culture. Prehistoric contacts between Amerindians and Pacific Islanders are strongly suggested by genetic and cultural traits. It is not discarded that Uros could have come from Pacific Islands: Uros show melanic skin and are dolichocephalic; in contrast, surrounding Aymara people have a clear skin and are brachicephalic. The Kon-Tiki project led by Thor Heyerdahl showed that a simple sailing is possible between Peru and Polynesia Islands; also, the most ancient skull found in America is of black origin: Luzia, suggesting that first America peopling was also carried out by Black/coloured people."

    and later migrations to the America's from black people;

    Although this entity once was thought to be confined to the Negro race, cases have been reported in white families, most of whom were of Mediterranean stock.6' 7,11 X-ray findings of the skulls in Mayan Indians were suggestive of sickle cell disease.20 It has also been described in Mexicans. The sickle cell trait was found in 7.3 per cent of a series of over eight thousand Negroes,9 with a higher percentage in South African natives.10


    A disorder (sickle cell) of Sudanese Nubian origins wound of in American civilizations.



    Since it's already been proven that black Africans migrated to the Americas over 100,000 years ago, it wouldn't really make sense to argue that a later more advanced group of Africans could not, and (based on the numerous lines of bio-cultural evidence) did not.

    My pictures are the results that show up when you search for "ancient Egypt Old Kingdom art."
    You're saying all of this, without acknowledging that the largest statue in the entire World which is in Egypt obviously represents a black person;



    Eurocentric Jedi mind tricks are outdated. FYI.

    Much of your argument is based on vague subjective physical similarities between depictions (or descriptions) of ancient Egyptians and modern tropical African populations.
    I would say that the bulk of what I have posted have been "studies" and conclusive statements from academic authorities on the relevant mattes regarding the ancient Egyptians bio-cultural affinities. Those affinities rest with "black Africans". You didn't acknowledge the statements from Kathryn Bards or SOY Keita, because you didn't like them, and you expect for me or even those supporting you against the "Afrocentric Boogey" to really take you seriously. You have no answer to knockout blow sources proving my point. The Egyptians were black Africans get over it.

    They resemble modern "white" Egyptians whether or not their skin was white, olive, or reddish-brown.
    If you want to see "white Egyptians' then all that you have do is look at the Late Dynastic Period artwork;



    See thin nose, flat faces, and little lips. Those features are in stark contrast with real indigenous Dynastic Egyptians;



    It also doesn't help that some of the examples you post for Africans that the Egyptians should resemble are people of mixed West African and Northwest European ancestry.
    You must not have learned from the sources posted about indigenous African variability. You non Africans cannot add anything into your African parents genetic gene pool.

    If there's one thing you should take away from that genetic model is the fact that modern Egyptians are not descended from Arabian migrants. In contrast to Ethiopians (or many other North Africans for that matter), the Southwest Asians they share the closest affinity to are Levantines.
    There is no reason for you to repost that, because it's irrelevant! The point is that Modern Egyptians, especially those in the north are more representative of foreigner Eurasians than the core indigenous populations of the ancient African civilization;



    Their affinities are irrelevant to the discussion, because they are not representative of the ancient population.

    I don't doubt that both modern and ancient Upper Egyptians will likely have greater affinity to Northern Sudan and Red Sea populations while Lower Egyptians will have greater affinity to Mediterranean populations,
    The latter is an unfounded claim. The evidence points to Lower Egyptians being indigenous black Africans, falling within the range of variability of other black African populations.


    The only person here attached to "land mass identity" is you by claiming that Egyptians were "black Africans" due in part to the fact that Egypt is on the African
    No it's actually based on conclusive bio-cultural evidence already presented to you, but rather than acknowledge the knock out punch you keep running.

    landmass, completely ignoring the fact that it's in much closer proximity to both the Levant and Arabia than it is to almost any of the other regions in Africa where you claim the true descendants of ancient Egyptians fled.
    You are ignorant of the most fundamental research and agreed upon conclusions in mainstream academia regarding this topic;


    "There is no archaeological, linguistic, or historical data which indicate a European or Asiatic invasion of, or migration to, the Nile Valley during First Dynasty times. Previous concepts about the origin of the First Dynasty Egyptians as being somehow external to the Nile Valley or less native are not supported by archaeology... In summary, the Abydos First Dynasty royal tomb contents reveal a notable craniometric heterogeneity. Southerners predominate. (Kieta, S. (1992) Further Studies of Crania From Ancient Northern Africa: An Analysis of Crania From First Dynasty Egyptian Tombs, Using Multiple Discriminant Functions. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 87:245-254)"

    Yet you feel compelled you keep talking as though you know what in the Hell you're talking about. You're actually hoping to find evidence of a dynastic "Caucasoid" race from Arabia (even after I've provided evidence that the inhabitants of neighboring Arabia were black Cushitic/Hamitic Africans at the time), rather than accepting that overwhelming evidence proves that ancient Egypt was of an inner Africa (namely Nubian) origin. That is called Cognitive Dissonance. You hate what the evidence implies, so you ignore it and dance around to another theory. This is the pattern throughout just about all of your post in this thread.

  2. #152
    Registered Users
    Posts
    63
    Sex
    Location
    Amerika ist wunderbar
    Ethnicity
    Greco-Mediterranean
    Nationality
    White American
    Y-DNA
    J2b2*
    mtDNA
    H1

    Germany Japan Italy
    he distinctions found in ancient pre-dynastic cultures were between distinct black African races. The Naqada culture of pre-dynastic Upper Egypt had a major Cushitic/Dravidian element, along with a presence of "Niger-Congo speaking".
    Somalis were craniofacially intermediate between Sub-Saharan West and Central Africans and Neolithic Europeans/Modern People of the Maghreb

    Brace shows the predynastic Upper Egytians from Naqada are craniofacially intermediate between Maghrebis/Neolithic Europeans and Somalis...perhaps slightly deviating in a Somali directions say 60/40.

    Lower Ancient Egyptians group totally in the Maghreb.

    So yeah I don't see how this proves "Black Egypt" when they're 3/4ths of the way to Middle Eastern/North African populations. If "Black Egypt" were true and there was no Eurasian influence then we'd at least expect them to be something in between Somalis and West/Central Africans. But they arent. So yeah you're just gonna have to get over it. There's a huge Eurasian element in Ancient Egyptians..deal with it.


    Those were black people... At the end of the day this is what you have to get over;
    Just cause they didn't have pale white skin does not mean they had Black or dark brown skin like those of sub-Saharan Africa..probably something intermediate.


    That desperate Eurocentric unpublished junk science. No reason to discuss something that the author was to ashamed to publish...

    Here's an actual published peer reviewed study focused on relevant criteria;

    "The raw values in Table 6 suggest that Egyptians had the "super-Negroid" body plan described by Robins (1983).. This pattern is supported by Figure 7 (a plot of population mean femoral and tibial lengths; data from Ruff, 1994), which indicates that the Egyptians generally have tropical body plans. Of the Egyptian samples, only the Badarian and Early Dynastic period populations have shorter tibiae than predicted from femoral length. Despite these differences, all samples lie relatively clustered together as compared to the other populations." (Zakrzewski, S.R. (2003). "Variation in ancient Egyptian stature and body proportions". American Journal of Physical Anthropology 121 (3): 219-229.
    It's not junk science at all, all that data came from ruff 1994 and is in the peer reviewed literature. The only thing Raxter added was measurements on Ancient Egyptians and Ancient Nubians. So you'd have to be charging her with fraud or false data...which is basically libel at this point since there's no evidence she's fudging data. Also, even if we discard her comment about how limb proportions "may" be more plastic than bi-iliac breadth...we still have to remember several things.

    1. Robins and Shute said in 1986 that having tropical limb proportions "does not mean the Ancient Egyptians were Negroes". So having tropical limb proportions does not automatically equate to being Negros or sub-saharan African.

    2. Can you please show me evidence in the peer reviewed literature that say limb proportions are a better indicator of climatic adaptation than bi-iliac breadth? Because in bi-iliac breadth Ancient Egyptians do not group with tropical groups, and instead group with Near Eastern and Mediterranean groups.

    3. What are the limb proportions of modern Egyptians? I'd bet they are similar to Ancient Egyptians. Show me proof modern Egyptians have much less tropical limb proportions than the ancient ones.

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to Arch Hades For This Useful Post:

     Power77 (02-12-2019)

  4. #153
    Quote Originally Posted by Arch Hades View Post
    Even if the Egyptian genomes we currently have were say 50% Bronze Age Levant 50% Ancient Old Kingdom Egyptian....it will be a very bad outcome for the Afrocentrists.
    You're not being informative with those descriptions...An answer as to who "Bronze Age Levantine" on your behalf has to be based completely on assumption. Here is an ancient depiction of a "Bronze Age Levantine" (it's just sounds so stupid given the assumption behind it);


    Bronze Age Levantines in the depiction have the same skin tone and facial features (thick lips, dark hair, ebony skin) of most of the folks in my African American family. Your interpretations of this research wreaks of a revamped version of the widespread 19th century wandering Caucasoid fantasies.

  5. #154
    Registered Users
    Posts
    63
    Sex
    Location
    Amerika ist wunderbar
    Ethnicity
    Greco-Mediterranean
    Nationality
    White American
    Y-DNA
    J2b2*
    mtDNA
    H1

    Germany Japan Italy
    Quote Originally Posted by Asante View Post
    You're not being informative with those descriptions...An answer as to who "Bronze Age Levantine" on your behalf has to be based completely on assumption. Here is an ancient depiction of a "Bronze Age Levantine" (it's just sounds so stupid given the assumption behind it);


    Bronze Age Levantines in the depiction have the same skin tone and facial features (thick lips, dark hair, ebony skin) of most of the folks in my African American family. Your interpretations of this research wreaks of a revamped version of the widespread 19th century wandering Caucasoid fantasies.
    We have genomes of Bronze Age Levantines, and they're not African at all you nutter. You're really one of those nutters that thinks the whole world used to be black.



  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Arch Hades For This Useful Post:

     Power77 (02-12-2019),  Ruderico (02-12-2019)

  7. #155
    Quote Originally Posted by Arch Hades View Post
    Somalis were craniofacially intermediate between Sub-Saharan West and Central Africans and Neolithic Europeans/Modern People of the Maghreb
    What's your point?

    " These studies suggest a recent and primary subdivision between African and non-African populations, high levels of divergence among African populations, and a recent shared common ancestry of non-African populations, from a population originating in Africa. The intermediate position, between African and non-African populations, that the Ethiopian Jews and Somalis occupy in the PCA plot also has been observed in other genetic studies (Ritte et al. 1993; Passarino et al. 1998) and could be due either to shared common ancestry or to recent gene flow. The fact that the Ethiopians and Somalis have a subset of the sub-Saharan African haplotype diversity and that the non-African populations have a subset of the diversity present in Ethiopians and Somalis makes simple-admixture models less likely; rather, these observations support the hypothesis proposed by other nuclear-genetic studies (Tishkoff et al. 1996a, 1998a, 1998b; Kidd et al. 1998) that populations in northeastern Africa may have diverged from those in the rest of sub-Saharan Africa early in the history of modern African populations and that a subset of this northeastern-African population migrated out of Africa and populated the rest of the globe. These conclusions are supported by recent mtDNA analysis (Quintana-Murci et al. 1999)."
    [Tishkoff et al. (2000) Short Tandem-Repeat Polymorphism/Alu Haplotype Variation at the PLAT Locus: Implications for Modern Human Origins. Am J Hum Genet; 67:901-925]

    Non Africans are essentially the children of our African genetic brothers conjoined by the PN2 clade.

    Brace shows the predynastic Upper Egytians from Naqada are craniofacially intermediate between Maghrebis/Neolithic Europeans and Somalis...perhaps slightly deviating in a Somali directions say 60/40.
    Brace 2006 as interpreted by a researcher;

    "This finding is in agreement with morphological data that suggest that populations with sub-Saharan morphological elements were present in northeastern Africa, from the Paleolithic to at least the early Holocene, and diffused northward to the Levant and Anatolia beginning in the Mesolithic. Indeed, the rare and incomplete Paleolithic to early Neolithic skeletal specimens found in Egypt - such as the 33,000-year-old Nazlet Khater specimen (Pinhasi and Semai 2000), the Wadi Kubbaniya skeleton from the late Paleolithic site in the upper Nile valley (Wendorf et al. 1986), the Qarunian (Faiyum) early Neolithic crania (Henneberg et al. 1989; Midant-Reynes 2000), and the Nabta specimen from the Neolithic Nabta Playa site in the western desert of Egypt (Henneberg et al. 1980) - show, with regard to the great African biological diversity, similarities with some of the sub-Saharan middle Paleolithic and modern sub-Saharan specimens. This affinity pattern between ancient Egyptians and sub-Saharans has also been noticed by several other investigators (Angel 1972; Berry and Berry 1967, 1972; Keita 1995) and has been recently reinforced by the study of Brace et al. (2005), which clearly shows that the cranial morphology of prehistoric and recent northeast African populations is linked to sub-Saharan populations (Niger-Congo populations). These results support the hypothesis that some of the Paleolithic-early Holocene populations from northeast Africa were probably descendents of sub-Saharan ancestral populationsF. X. Ricaut, M. Waelkens. (2008). Cranial Discrete Traits in a Byzantine Population and Eastern Mediterranean Population Movements Human Biology - Volume 80, Number 5, October 2008, pp. 535-564

    Lower Ancient Egyptians group totally in the Maghreb.
    "Totally Dude"!?!!? Where and when? Not sure how you eagerly came to that conclusion, but I can assure you that it is "baseless".

    So yeah I don't see how this proves "Black Egypt" when they're 3/4ths of the way to Middle Eastern/North African populations.
    WTF are you talking about Middle Eastern populations, as though that is a real political region;

    "Overall, when the Egyptian crania are evaluated in a Near Eastern (Lachish) versus African (Kerma, Jebel Moya, Ashanti) context) the affinity is with the Africans. The Sudan and Palestine are the most appropriate comparative regions which would have 'donated' people, along with the Sahara and Maghreb. Archaeology validates looking to these regions for population flow (see Hassan 1988)... Egyptian groups showed less overall affinity to Palestinian and Byzantine remains than to other African series

    So yeah you're just gonna have to get over it. There's a huge Eurasian element in Ancient Egyptians..deal with it.
    Boy go sit your flat ass down somewhere.

    The study on the partial calvarium discovered at Manot Cave, Western Galilee, Israel (dated to 54.7 ± 5.5 kyr BP, Hershkovitz et al. 2015), revealed close morphological affinity with recent African skulls as well as with early Upper Paleolithic European skulls, but less so with earlier anatomically modern humans from the Levant (e.g., Skhul). The ongoing fieldwork at the Manot Cave has resulted in the discovery of several new hominin teeth. These include a lower incisor (I1), a right lower first deciduous molar (dm1), a left upper first deciduous molar (dm1) and an upper second molar (M2) all from area C (>32 kyr) and a right upper second molar (M2) from area E (>36 kyr). The current study presents metric and morphological data on the new Manot Cave teeth. These new data combined with our already existing knowledge on the Manot skull may provide an important insight on the Upper Paleolithic population of the Levant, its origin and dietary habits.
    —Author(s): Rachel Sarig ; Ofer Marder ; Omry Barzilai ; Bruce Latimer ; Israel Hershkovitz

    The Upper Paleolithic inhabitants of Manot Cave: the dental perspective (Year: 2017)

    Your Pre-Historic "Eurasians" were still obviously black Africans.

    It's not junk science at all, all that data came from ruff 1994 and is in the peer reviewed literature.
    The author was too ashamed to publish the paper, so I'm not going to waste my time arguing some unpublished bullshit.

  8. #156
    Quote Originally Posted by Arch Hades View Post
    We have genomes of Bronze Age Levantines, and they're not African at all you nutter. You're really one of those nutters that thinks the whole world used to be black.
    Well let's look at ancient Levant firstly;

    The study on the partial calvarium discovered at Manot Cave, Western Galilee, Israel (dated to 54.7 ± 5.5 kyr BP, Hershkovitz et al. 2015), revealed close morphological affinity with recent African skulls as well as with early Upper Paleolithic European skulls, but less so with earlier anatomically modern humans from the Levant (e.g., Skhul). The ongoing fieldwork at the Manot Cave has resulted in the discovery of several new hominin teeth. These include a lower incisor (I1), a right lower first deciduous molar (dm1), a left upper first deciduous molar (dm1) and an upper second molar (M2) all from area C (>32 kyr) and a right upper second molar (M2) from area E (>36 kyr). The current study presents metric and morphological data on the new Manot Cave teeth. These new data combined with our already existing knowledge on the Manot skull may provide an important insight on the Upper Paleolithic population of the Levant, its origin and dietary habits.
    —Author(s): Rachel Sarig ; Ofer Marder ; Omry Barzilai ; Bruce Latimer ; Israel Hershkovitz

    The Upper Paleolithic inhabitants of Manot Cave: the dental perspective (Year: 2017)

    The entire World was black at one point...



    Western scientist concluded that fact, as well as the common sense record. Non black people are "genetically recessive"....they can NEVER produce a melaninated population;



    Non black people are recent mutants based from the words of a Chinese Bio-geneticist;

    Last edited by Asante; 02-12-2019 at 07:37 AM.

  9. #157
    Registered Users
    Posts
    619
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Ashkenazi Jew
    Nationality
    American
    Y-DNA
    Q-Y2750
    mtDNA
    H47

    United States of America Israel
    There's really no point in responding in detail to your insane posts, but I will just say that you seem very confused about the relationship between skin color and regional ancestry...

  10. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to jonahst For This Useful Post:

     Nebuchadnezzar II (02-12-2019),  Power77 (02-12-2019),  Pribislav (02-12-2019),  Ruderico (02-12-2019),  Theconqueror (02-12-2019),  Tz85 (02-13-2019)

  11. #158
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,219
    Sex
    Location
    North Florida
    Ethnicity
    Pred.Iberian/Italian
    Nationality
    American
    Y-DNA
    R1b-Z279(xM153)
    mtDNA
    L2a1a3c

    United States of America Spain Basque Italy Portugal Cuba
    Quote Originally Posted by Asante View Post
    Incorrect, those "light" skin variants are found in pitch black African populations today, as my sources indicate above.
    Proof or GTFA! Find me a pitch black African with rs16891982 homozygous! Moreover; find me a pitch black African without a mutation in MFSD12

    https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017...ww.google.com/

    The first surprise was that SLC24A5, which swept Europe, is also common in East Africa—found in as many as half the members of some Ethiopian groups. This variant arose 30,000 years ago and was probably brought to eastern Africa by people migrating from the Middle East, Tishkoff says. But though many East Africans have this gene, they don’t have white skin, probably because it is just one of several genes that shape their skin color.

    The team also found variants of two neighboring genes, HERC2 and OCA2, which are associated with light skin, eyes, and hair in Europeans but arose in Africa; these variants are ancient and common in the light-skinned San people. The team proposes that the variants arose in Africa as early as 1 million years ago and spread later to Europeans and Asians. “Many of the gene variants that cause light skin in Europe have origins in Africa,” Tishkoff says.

    The most dramatic discovery concerned a gene known as MFSD12. Two mutations that decrease expression of this gene were found in high frequencies in people with the darkest skin. These variants arose about a half-million years ago, suggesting that human ancestors before that time may have had moderately dark skin, rather than the deep black hue created today by these mutations.

    These same two variants are found in Melanesians, Australian Aborigines, and some Indians. These people may have inherited the variants from ancient migrants from Africa who followed a “southern route” out of East Africa, along the southern coast of India to Melanesia and Australia, Tishkoff says. That idea, however, counters three genetic studies that concluded last year that Australians, Melanesians, and Eurasians all descend from a single migration out of Africa. Alternatively, this great migration may have included people carrying variants for both light and dark skin, but the dark variants later were lost in Eurasians.

    To understand how the MFSD12 mutations help make darker skin, the researchers reduced expression of the gene in cultured cells, mimicking the action of the variants in dark-skinned people. The cells produced more eumelanin, the pigment responsible for black and brown skin, hair, and eyes. The mutations may also change skin color by blocking yellow pigments: When the researchers knocked out MFSD12 in zebrafish and mice, red and yellow pigments were lost, and the mice’s light brown coats turned gray. “This new mechanism for producing intensely dark pigmentation is really the big story,” says Nina Jablonski, an anthropologist at Pennsylvania State University in State College.
    Quote Originally Posted by Asante View Post
    Your opinion lacks knowledge...so it's not worth considering. If you want to gain some knowledge on the subject then you can surf through my post throughout this thread.
    Psttt. Did you know the Earth is flat! If I want to get a headache and lose about 50 IQ points I can surf to your religious horseshit of a post! Maybe then we will be at the same level of understanding. If you want to gain some knowledge; start reading actual scientific studies and stop reading nonsensical horseshit propaganda from the internet that pretty much can be summarized as: "We wuz everybody". Otherwise; no thanks. I'm out.
    Last edited by jeanL; 02-12-2019 at 11:02 AM.

  12. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to jeanL For This Useful Post:

     jonahst (02-12-2019),  MikeWhalen (02-12-2019),  Nebuchadnezzar II (02-12-2019),  Power77 (02-12-2019)

  13. #159
    Registered Users
    Posts
    366
    Sex
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Ethnicity
    English & Greek
    Nationality
    British
    Y-DNA
    J2-L397
    mtDNA
    H2a2a1

    Italy Hungary Poland
    Quote Originally Posted by Asante View Post
    The entire World was black at one point...


    Why is such a ridiculous level of Afrocentric dialogue being allowed to persist on this site?

  14. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to LTG For This Useful Post:

     jonahst (02-12-2019),  MikeWhalen (02-12-2019),  Nebuchadnezzar II (02-12-2019),  NetNomad (02-14-2019),  Power77 (02-12-2019),  Ruderico (02-12-2019),  Theconqueror (02-12-2019)

  15. #160
    [ADMIN]

    Thread closed due to an egregious breach of the following Terms of Service:

    3.11 Further to the above, threads or posts forwarding requests for ethnicity guessing or 'classifications' based on the pseudoscientific precepts of 'racial taxonomy' are automatically considered as both devoid of substance and trivial. Such content will be deleted without prior notice. Please note members who persistently defy this aspect of content moderation will be sanctioned as deemed appropriate by the administration.
    3.12 Anthrogenica encourages its members to participate in discussions in a topic-focused manner. Personalization of discussions is completely prohibited at all times. This includes (and is not limited to) direct personal attacks, accusations, insinuations and false disclosures. Additionally, discussions that degenerate into inconsequential flaming or inanity will be deleted without prior notice. Note that this discussion policy also applies to Anthrogenica's Private Messaging and Visitor Message functions.
    Infractions are likely to follow.

    Quote Originally Posted by LTG View Post
    Why is such a ridiculous level of Afrocentric dialogue being allowed to persist on this site?
    We cannot act if nobody reports problem content to us. A handful of reports came through early on. The egregious breach of our Terms took place afterwards (fex. accusing a chunk of the participants here of "anti-African Eurocentric bigotry etc.").

    We're obliged to give unpopular (but sourced) opinions latitude up until the point where the community's chimed in. Should the initiator's retorts become increasingly reliant on strawman arguments or ad hominems, as happened here, none of this content will be allowed to fester further.

    Please report content to us and we'll act as appropriate.
    Forum Reminders - Please remember to:
    Report any problematic content • Adhere to Anthrogenica Hidden Content • Discuss respectfully • Be mindful of sharing user data (both yours and others) • English language only in main forum area • PM 'Moderator' for basic maintenance tasks or information about member suspensions or bans

  16. The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to Administrator For This Useful Post:

     jonahst (02-12-2019),  Kale (02-12-2019),  LTG (02-12-2019),  MikeWhalen (02-12-2019),  Nebuchadnezzar II (02-12-2019),  NiloSaharan (02-12-2019),  Onur Dincer (02-13-2019),  Power77 (02-12-2019),  Psynome (02-12-2019),  Ruderico (02-12-2019),  Saetro (02-13-2019),  Sangarius (02-12-2019),  Theconqueror (02-12-2019)

Page 16 of 16 FirstFirst ... 6141516

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 123
    Last Post: 01-24-2019, 09:15 PM
  2. Ancient Egyptian mummy genomes
    By rozenfeld in forum Ancient (aDNA)
    Replies: 256
    Last Post: 12-14-2018, 07:37 AM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-11-2017, 09:47 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-11-2017, 09:41 PM
  5. mtDNA I2 from an Egyptian mummy
    By Jean M in forum I
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 05-27-2017, 01:16 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •