True Origins

Get your knowledge here...


view:  full / summary

Response to Barros Serranos from topix.

Posted by big mike M on June 10, 2012 at 8:40 PM Comments 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... 8)

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! 8)

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!

Proof that early Europeans were African.

Posted by big mike M on June 5, 2012 at 7:35 AM Comments 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.


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.