|Posted by big mike M on June 10, 2012 at 8:40 PM||comments (0)|
Why the hell should I not call you a Eurocentric. When you call everyone who doesn't agree with you aftonazis!!! And you E-thug everyone...
And when the f**k did I say WA and were exactly the same as east and north Africans. I said are f**king related. Like a distant cousin, but they aren't exactly the same! And I graduated from college thank very much. And how many f**king times do I have to tell you that Africans have different phenotypes because of different climates/environments! DNAtribes said the mummies and king tut can trace their ancestry from south Africa, great lake region and the west Africa!
Recent studies are saying that King Tut died of sickle cells. Which is mainly found in west Africans!
Explains that one... Please!
Africans are indeed very diverse genetically because they are the source population for all mankind. The older a population is, the more accumulation of genetic variation and thus diversity. However, greater diversity does NOT mean less relativity. For example, even among the gene pool of a single isolated population where much inbreeding has occurred there is still some form of variation or diversity. It may not be as much as say a larger population that has much contact and geneflow with other populations. Still even among the gene pool of a single family there is genetic variation also even if all members are related to one another. The same can be said of Africans. Genetically there are many clades and subclades and even variation within subclades that are to be found among Africans, yet just because you have individuals who carry lineages of a certain clade does not mean they are not related or even share other genetic characteristics with individuals who carry lineages of another clade, especially if all these individuals reside within the same community or region. Because Africans have such tremendous genetic diversity, there is actually more genetic variation within a single village in Africa than there is in say a state in the U.S. or a nation in Europe, but that doesn't mean all these villagers have no relation to one another! An even better example would be chimpanzees, our closest related species. The chimp species is even older than humans which is why their genetic diversity is even greater still. Two individual chimpanzees of the same population in the same forest have more genetic variations between them than two individual humans who live in opposite ends of the globe, but that does not mean they are unrelated!
As for Egypt. Geology shows that the Sahara desert did not always exist and North Africa was once green and fertile. Archaeology also shows that the area that is now Egypt has also received migrations of populations from farther west in the central Sahara as North Africa began to dry out and turn to desert. This is supported by genetics such as the fact that Egyptians carry the Benin variety of HBS (sickle cell anemia).
Note that while ancient Egyptians share many cultural features with other east Africans, there are other cultural peculiarities such as ritual masks, dolls, the wearing of wigs, and iconographic styles that are to be found in West Africa. What's funny is that Eurocentric racialist try to associate any so-called 'Eurasian' lineage in Africa with stereotyped "caucasian" features yet all the carriers of R1 derived haplogroups in West Africa are stereotypically "negroid" in characteristics yet nobody tries to 'relate' these "forest n*gros" with indigenous white Europeans who carry share the same clade! LOL In the meantime there are Europeans especially southern Europeans in the Mediterranean who carry E lineages clearly inherited from Africans in the neolithic, yet you hardly hear a peep about African migrations into Europe and African admixture among Europeans when that is clearly the case!
|Posted by big mike M on June 5, 2012 at 7:35 AM||comments (0)|
Early Europeans, as recently as
6,000-9000 years ago, looked somewhat
like Africans in terms of retained
'tropical' characteristics. Cold adaptation
was to bring about several physical
changes over time from the initial Out of
Africa migrations to Europe. Retained
traces of 'tropical' characteristics,
indicate a "large African role in the
origins of anatomically modern
Europeans." (Holliday and Churchill
"Body proportions covary with climate,
apparently as the result of climatic
selection. Ontogenetic research and
migrant studies have demonstrated that
body proportions are largely genetically
controlled and are under low selective
rates; thus studies of body form can
provide evidence for evolutionarily
short-term dispersals and/or gene flow.
Replacement predicts that the earliest
modern Europeans will possess
"tropical" body proportions (assuming
Africa is the center of origin), while
Regional Continuity permits only minor
shifts in body shape, due to climatic
change and/or improved cultural
buffering... results refute the hypothesis
of local continuity in Europe, and are
consistent with an interpretation of
elevated gene flow (and population
dispersal?) from Africa, followed by
subsequent climatic adaptation to colder
conditions." (Holliday, Trenton (1997)
Body proportions in Late Pleistocene
Europe and modern human origins.
Journal of Human Evolution, Volume 32,
Issue 5, 1997, Pages 423-447)
".. while the Late Upper Paleolithic and
Mesolithic humans have significantly
higher (i.e., tropically-adapted) brachial
and crural indices than do recent
Europeans, they also have shorter (i.e.,
cold-adapted) limbs. The somewhat
paradoxical retention of "tropical"
indices in the context of more
"cold-adapted" limb length is best
explained as evidence for Replacement in
the European Late Pleistocene, followed
by gradual cold adaptation in glacial
Europe." (Holliday, Trenton (1999)
Brachial and crural indices of European
Late Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic
humans. Journal of Human Evolution.
Volume 36, Issue 5, May 1999, Pages
"Stature, body mass, and body
proportions are evaluated for the
Cheddar Man (Gough's Cave 1) skeleton.
Like many of his Mesolithic
contemporaries, Gough's Cave 1 evinces
relatively short estimated stature (ca.
166.2 cm [5' 5']) and low body mass (ca.
66 kg [146 lbs]). In body shape, he is
similar to recent Europeans for most
proportional indices. He differs,
however, from most recent Europeans in
his high crural index and tibial
length/trunk height indices. Thus, while
Gough's Cave 1 is characterized by a
total morphological pattern considered
'cold-adapted', these latter two traits may
be interpreted as evidence of a large
African role in the origins of anatomically
modern Europeans." (TRENTON W.
HOLLIDAY a1 and STEVEN E.
CHURCHILL.(2003). Gough's Cave 1
(Somerset, England): an assessment of
body size and shape, Bulletin of the
Natural History Museum: Geology,
58:37-44 Cambridge University Press)
More data showing early Europeans
were tropically adapted types like
"Body proportions are under strong
climatic selection and evince remarkable
stability within regional lineages. As
such, they offer a viable and robust
alternative to cranio-facial data in
assessing hypothesised continuity and
replacement with the transition to
agro-pastoralism in central Europe.
Humero-clavicular, brachial and crural
indices in a large sample (n=75) of
Linienbandkeramik (LBK), Late
Neolithic and Early Bronze Age
specimens from the middle
Elbe-Saale-Werra valley (MESV) were
compared with Eurasian and African
terminal Pleistocene, European
Mesolithic and geographically disparate
recent human specimens. Mesolithic
Europeans display considerable variation
in humero-clavicular and brachial indices
yet none approach the extreme
"hyper-polar" morphology of LBK
humans from the MESV. In contrast,
Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age
peoples display elongated brachial and
crural indices reminiscent of terminal
Pleistocene and "tropically adapted"
recent humans. These marked
morphological changes likely reflect
exogenous immigration during the
terminal Fourth millennium cal BC.
Population expansion and diffusion is a
function of increased mobility and
settlement dispersal concomitant with
significant technological and subsistence
changes in later Neolithic societies during
the late fourth millennium cal BCE."
-- Gallagher et al. "Population continuity,
demic diffusion and Neolithic origins in
central-southern Germany: the evidence
from body proportions." Homo.
2009;60(2):95-126. Epub 2009 Mar 4.