Reply to Thread New Thread |
![]() |
#21 |
|
Belonging to an ethnic group, or population that posses genetic markers commonly found in another ethnicity/population does not equal admixture. The Hausa share R1b with western Europeans such as Spaniards, at a high frequency; that my friend does not make the Hausa mixed with Spaniards, or Spaniards mixed with Hausa. R1b in africans IS evidence of admixture, thats fact wheter you like it or not, because it has a very recent appearance in africa compared to europe and is downstreams derived. and its not just about phenotype, but also the fact that the "africans" that have features that resemble euroasians do in fact cluster closer to those euroasians compared to pure negroids. so dont give me the natural diversity excuse, its false. and yes djimon hounso and wesley snipes do represent what majority of non mixed black africans look like, north africans originally came from euroasia and east africans have admixture from euroasians/caucasoids (yes caucasoid is a legit term that is still used and accepted) so they dont represent what the pure africans look like. and yes the fulani most likely have an early origin in northeast africa, so they are without a doubt mixed as well. "While their origins is a subject to many theses, the Fulani Historian Aboubacry Moussa Lam, of the University Cheikh Anta Diop in Dakar, one of the leading Egyptologist in Africa, favored the Nile theses. In his well documented book De L`Origine Egyptienne des Peuls, Professor Lam developed a theory supporting a migration from East to West (Egypt, Ethiopia, along the Sahara), and then a second migration to the opposite direction (Eastward)" http://pulaarspeaking.net/whoarethefulani.aspx |
![]() |
![]() |
#22 |
|
[QUOTE=JaM;464815]I can't see why I should trust a random stranger on the net, when I can just ask my Aboriginal relatives?
Who asked you to trust me? I said Listen Yes, locally, based on derogatory labelling by the colonists. And I don't care if African Americans are "Black" so I never said that "they are Black". Black is descriptive, not derogatory. NIGGER is derogatory In this context, in order to be a valid global "category", it has to be applied to people who are the same in some way, such as shared origin, culture or whatever you can come up with. Otherwise it is just a colour. I don't consider "Black" a valid racial term in any case. LOL and the term black was and applied to people of a certain appearance Generally DARK. And guess what IT DID HAPPEN GLOBALLY. it Happened in India, Eastern Asia, Melanesia, Australia, Africa, The Americas. Thats pretty global. I AM NOT Agreeing with the designation of Melanesians as black because Africans are Labeled black. AFRICA is not the benchmark for blackness, Ati (negritos) were not called little blacks because kenyans were black, They were designated as black because they bared certain characteristics, that allowed them to be designated as such. SO I have no Idea why you keep saying Melanesians are not AFricans What does that have to do with anything. Maybe they will. At first glance, some people will probably call them Black, but don't think that American/English labels are especially valid globally. It all depends on what you mean by the label you use, so it also depends on context. The "white" people who are considered Black are not especially tanned, but still the label "black" is used. There's no "global perception" of people, but you're trying to create one, it seems. And that label of blackness for those white people does not Exist Globally, "black" as a term for dark skinned people Has/does. |
![]() |
![]() |
#23 |
|
R1b in africans IS evidence of admixture, thats fact wheter you like it or not, because it has a very recent appearance in africa compared to europe and is downstreams derived. and its not just about phenotype, but also the fact that the "africans" that have features that resemble euroasians do in fact cluster closer to those euroasians compared to pure negroids. so dont give me the natural diversity excuse, its false. more bullshit and denial from you, get over it you're wrong about every point here. E1b1b in west-eurasia IS evidence of admixture, thats fact whether you like it or not, because it has a very recent appearance in europe compared to africa and is downstreams derived. and its not just about phenotype, but also the fact that the "west-eurasians" that have features that resemble africans do in fact cluster closer to those africans compared to pure south indians & east-asians. so dont give me the natural diversity excuse, its false. ![]() ![]() ^I agree that white people's afros and flat nose means E1b1b in europe should be evidence of admixture going by Falsetruth's logic ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#24 |
|
more bullshit and denial from you, get over it youre wrong about every point here. ![]() R1b in Chadic people and Western Europeans isn't even the same subclade. To put it simply, there were two groups that successfully passed on this gene one being Chadic people and Western Europeans. and its not just about phenotype, but also the fact that the "africans" that have features that resemble euroasians do in fact cluster closer to those euroasians compared to pure negroids. so dont give me the natural diversity excuse, its false. Pure Negroids? Really? Meanwhile in 2011....... Did you say Hausas haves features that resemble Eurasians? Natural diveristy is an excuse? Ever head or sexual/natural Selection, you know a big reason why we look the way we do?. ![]() HAUSAS ![]() ![]() EURASIANS ![]() ![]() The resemblance is.........quite human ![]() And Yes Djimon Honsou and wesley snipes and Alek Wek do represent what majority of "non-mixed" black africans look like, north africans originally came from euroasia and east africans have admixture from euroasians/caucasoids (yes caucasoid is a legit term that is still used and accepted) so they dont represent what the pure africans look like . Caucasoid is NOT legit. Anthropology professors and Scholars AVOID IT, because in 2011 we study humans by Population/Genetics/Culture. You want to hold on to a stereotype so baldy because thats all you know. It's.....sad. A continent that people have beeen living on before anyone set foot in Europe needs admixture for diversity? and yes the fulani most likely have an early origin in northeast africa, so they are without a doubt mixed as well. PLease provide sources. Their lanuage is a Niger-Congo language, their Genetic profile matches that of the people around them WEST AFRICAN/SAHELIANS. Simple Source http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/Fulani.aspx "While their origins is a subject to many theses, the Fulani Historian Aboubacry Moussa Lam, of the University Cheikh Anta Diop in Dakar, one of the leading Egyptologist in Africa, favored the Nile theses. In his well documented book De L`Origine Egyptienne des Peuls, Professor Lam developed a theory supporting a migration from East to West (Egypt, Ethiopia, along the Sahara), and then a second migration to the opposite direction (Eastward)" The Origins of the Fulani Are highly debated and all results Point to a western African Origin, Linguistically/Culturally. Anta Diop Egypt theory is unproven is not a standard it is just his "theory". I am not against An east to west thesis though For SOME of the Origins of FEW of their ancestors as GENETICS has proven. Their Y and Mtdna, Has near 100% West African markers. I'm to attribute All the physical diversity to about 10% Eurasian genes? not their 90% West African Genes, or their West African Language, or sexual selection, which is even culturally observable? To top it al off their 10% Eurasian Admixture is likely passed through other Sahelians/West Africans. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT THEY ARE FROM ANY WHERE ELSE. |
![]() |
![]() |
#25 |
|
LOL and the term black was and applied to people of a certain appearance Generally DARK. And guess what IT DID HAPPEN GLOBALLY. it Happened in India, Eastern Asia, Melanesia, Australia, Africa, The Americas. Thats pretty global. Ps. you'r the one who brought up Africans, by the way. 1)Well it depends. Some aboriginal people consider themselves black, historically yes even in the 70's they were considered black, Even had a Panther inspired movement. |
![]() |
![]() |
#26 |
|
I wasn't referring to you, which is OBVIOUS from the quote I replied to. In the Americas that may be true, but there's a whole world out there. Black is certainly descriptive in a context. The context you ignore, it seems. There are some thing you just misinterpret, or you just take it out of context. Since that has happened twice now, I think it's pointless to go on. Especially as you constantly refer to things I never really said. Maybe you have some sort of prejudice already about my opinions as you seems to think I say something I don't but I think in that case here's no real purpose in continuing this. Ps. you'r the one who brought up Africans, by the way. They may be called black because they're dark, but other than dark skin they don't really resemble Africans in general. Melanesian and Australians have the colour in common with Africans, and nothing else, really I don't agree that you can say that Melanesians and Australians are "Black" and state that skin colour/appearance ONLY That would include a very tanned Khmer person too, in some cases, or some South Indians. Who sometimes magically would turn non-black if they stayed indoors for some time! |
![]() |
![]() |
#27 |
|
more bullshit and denial from you, get over it you're wrong about every point here. ![]() E1b1b in west asia came from egypt so when it entered it was from caucasoid people, and further if you go back to the origin, E is euroasian anyway, so there is no reason to believe that people with E1b1b lineages has ever had a black ancestor. E1b1 might(and might not have) have originated in the geographic area of the horn but mdoern horners are admxied anyway so theya re not representative of the population in which E1b1 originated in either case. ![]() and about your pics, i already explained the difference, west euroasians do not show any affinity to sub saharan people like west africans so there is no reason to believe that those features you show is because of black admixture, never mind the fact that sub sahran admixture in europe is VERY low and E haplogroups is extremely low as well. in comparison, foreign y-dna like T and J in east africa are quite high in frequency and we already know that east africans cluster in the middle of euroasians and west africans both genetically and in phenotype. so its not the same, also curly hair and a nose like her are not african traits, that girl looks finnish so maybe she has asian ancestry. |
![]() |
![]() |
#28 |
|
Who knows they might, might not be called black by them. They certainly look like a people from a sunny area and humid one at that, so that explains the convergent evolution.
came from egypt so when it entered it was from a caucasus people butt mdoern horners are admxied anyway so Yo. ![]() Check out the mediterranean and compare it with East Africa aside from the Amhara who are mixed and say they are from Arabia or whatev anyway. Who appears more homogenous, and who more mixed? And Caucasian Egypt. I would like you to enlighten me on something: what genes from the Middle East are Caucasian or come from the Caucasus (I'm aware some do, so this is a genuine question)? Or was your main point there just looks? |
![]() |
![]() |
#29 |
|
It has very recent appearance in Africa? Buddy R1b has its origins around 20,000 years ago in Western Asia and the next defined mutation of it is in Africa. The gene prospered in Chadic speaking populations and in Western Europe, but is extremely low nearly everywhere else. Even If your baseless, claim was true, are you saying that there was a big genetic contribution from Europeans specifically into "Chadic" people? Although human Y chromosomes belonging to haplogroup R1b are quite rare in Africa, being found mainly in Asia and Europe, a group of chromosomes within the paragroup R-P25* are found concentrated in the central-western part of the African continent, where they can be detected at frequencies as high as 95%. Phylogenetic evidence and coalescence time estimates suggest that R-P25* chromosomes (or their phylogenetic ancestor) may have been carried to Africa by an Asia-to-Africa back migration in prehistoric times. Here, we describe six new mutations that define the relationships among the African R-P25* Y chromosomes and between these African chromosomes and earlier reported R-P25 Eurasian sub-lineages. The incorporation of these new mutations into a phylogeny of the R1b haplogroup led to the identification of a new clade (R1b1a or R-V88) encompassing all the African R-P25* and about half of the few European/west Asian R-P25* chromosomes. A worldwide phylogeographic analysis of the R1b haplogroup provided strong support to the Asia-to-Africa back-migration hypothesis. The analysis of the distribution of the R-V88 haplogroup in >1800 males from 69 African populations revealed a striking genetic contiguity between the Chadic-speaking peoples from the central Sahel and several other Afroasiatic-speaking groups from North Africa. The R-V88 coalescence time was estimated at 9200–5600 kya, in the early mid Holocene. We suggest that R-V88 is a paternal genetic record of the proposed mid-Holocene migration of proto-Chadic Afroasiatic speakers through the Central Sahara into the Lake Chad Basin, and geomorphological evidence is consistent with this view." and east africans are without a doubt admixed with caucasoids, you cant use sexual selection and natural variation as an excuse when basically none of the individuals share phenotype, you can find anything from pure negroids to intermediates and clsoe to pure caucasoid phenotypes there, while in comparison when you look at how widespread blue eyes have become in europe despite being recessive, that is a sign of sexual selection. aisans also look similar because of sexual selection and natural adaption, and indians look so different from each other because of the caste system but also because they are a combination of dravidian and indo-aryan (two distinctive caucasoid populations) also whenever a horner mixes with a euroasian, they end up looking like their euroasian parent, which suggests that the horner parent already has euroasian genes in him/her. and i havent heard any better theories about the fulani, but we already know for a fact that they have caucasoid/foreign admixture. http://www.jamtan.com/jamtan/fulani....&linksPage=226 Hassan et al found 54% Y-dna R1b1a (V88) in sudanese fulani. they also ahve y-dna T at notable ammounts, and T is euroasian in origin. ---------- Post added 2011-08-12 at 02:41 ---------- Who knows they might, might not be called black by them. They certainly look like a people from a sunny area and humid one at that, so that explains the convergent evolution. and also the fact that that L0-L2 exists in the horn along with A and B, today mixed together along with R,T,J,E who are all descendants from the CDEF-M168 mutation, along with L3 and M1. because A,B and L0-L2 doesnt exist in euroasia, that suggests that at the time of OOA there must have been 2 differentiated populations, one that stayed behind and eventually evolved into negroids, and one that migrated out from africa and evolved into caucasoids and mongoloids. and today you can see that autosomally east africans cluster in between euroasians and west africans, and the euroasian lineages of CDEF-M168 and M1 exists alongside A,B and L0-L2 in a mixed population, that strongly suggests taht some population came back and mixed with them because they no longer differentiate between each other. |
![]() |
![]() |
#30 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#31 |
|
lol if you where face to face with me now i would ragdoll you. a nose like her are not african traits, that girl looks finnish so maybe she has asian ancestry. ![]() ![]() west euroasians do not show any affinity to sub saharan people ![]() E is euroasian anyway, so there is no reason to believe that people with E1b1b lineages has ever had a black ancestor E1b1b in west asia came from egypt so when it entered it was from caucasoid people, and further if you go back to the origin…. ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|