|
Post by Mike the Jedi on Dec 26, 2005 15:01:07 GMT -5
They're too small. The ones in the former post are barely legible. The ones in the latter aren't even that.
|
|
|
Post by decadence on Dec 26, 2005 15:09:48 GMT -5
Ok I'll have to resize them, it'll take about five minutes.
|
|
|
Post by decadence on Dec 26, 2005 15:11:59 GMT -5
My computer act up, I'll post them at a different time.
|
|
|
Post by Dienekes on Dec 26, 2005 17:05:48 GMT -5
So are you implying that Nubians were originally Caucasoids? They certainly were not, at least the Wadi halfa Mesolithic and Sahaba Late Pleistocene populations. Jebel Sahaba = not typical of Nubians. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=15895433&query_hl=1&itool=pubmed_docsumIn accordance with the above qualitative observations, the row plot shows Jebel Sahaba as distinct from all others, whereas the latter 11 samples are more closely clustered: a pattern indicative of overall intersample trait homogeneity. If the present Nubian dental patterns are indeed indicative of underlying genetic variation (per Scott et al., 1983; Rightmire, 1999), it is unlikely that the Jebel Sahaba people were closely related to subsequent regional inhabitants. As such, this finding contradicts the idea of genetic continuity (see above) between Late Paleolithic and recent populations (i.e., Meroitic, X-Group, and Christian) (e.g., Greene, 1972; Carlson and Van Gerven, 1977; Small, 1981; Smith and Shegev, 1988; Calcagno, 1989), and instead suggests discontinuity (e.g., Irish and Turner, 1990; Turner and Markowitz, 1990; Irish, 1993, 1997, 1998a,b,d). In accordance with the latter model, it is then implied that replacement or genetic swamping of an existing gene pool by an outside group, or groups, occurred after the Pleistocene (Irish and Turner, 1990; Turner and Markowitz, 1990; Irish, 1998d). ALSO, to correct another of Charlie's erroneous statements: Though not explicitly studied, Neolithic and later samples also have markedly smaller teeth than Late Paleolithic Nubians (see also Greene, 1972; Calcagno, 1986, 1989). However, the latter’s dental complexity is likely not a factor in this temporal variation, as development of morphological traits is largely independent of dental size (Scott and Turner, 1997). In support of this statement, prior research (Irish, 2000) found that Late Paleolithic “Mechtoids” from Morocco have among the largest of all African teeth; yet they have the simplest morphology.Conversely, a San sample has the smallest teeth, yet possesses greater morphological complexity than other Africans (Haeussler et al., 1989; Irish, 1993).
|
|
|
Post by Planet Asia on Dec 26, 2005 17:29:04 GMT -5
Strawman, I never said Jebel Sahaba was typical of later Nubians, but theys nevertheless are the erliest Nubians in the fossil record. I knew Jebel Sahaba wasn't typical of later Nubians, I read that in Colin Groves' study on North Africans, what are you telling new? Irish has presented no evidence of any populations swarming the Nile valley replacing populations similar to Jebeal Sahaba, the archaeological record simply does not support this. However there is genetic and arhcaeological evidence for Africans migrating out of Africa and into the Levant [see C. Loring Brace 2005 study.].
|
|
|
Post by Planet Asia on Jan 19, 2006 4:52:35 GMT -5
Bottomline: Terp has presented no evidence of Egyptians clustering with Caucasoids. On the cranial non-metric (Hanihara et al., 2003), the "North Africans" are actually black Africans with the exception of the Gizeh E series, which clusters with Caucasoids or Negroids depending on which method is used. If you look at the plot, you will see that Naqada clusters closest to Kerma Nubians who are black Gizeh clusters nearest Nubians who are black, case closed, that map doe *NOT* show Egyptians clustering with Caucasoids.
In Brace's newest study predynastic Egyptians clustered with Nubians and Somalis,i.e. 'Prehistoric and Recent Northeast Africans' *NOT*Modern nor Prehistoric Mediterraneans, nor with Late Prehistoric Eurasians. From Brace's latest study for Terp:
"Combining samples
When groups that are close to each other in the dendrogram in Fig. 1 are combined to make a single dendrogram twig, the picture is simplified, but much the same conclusion is supported.....Algeria, Berber, Greece, Iran/Iraq, Italy, Morocco, Sicily and Tunisia samples were combined to generate a “Modern Mediterranean” twig....Next the Portuguese Mesolithic, Greek Neolithic, Italy Eneolithic, and Swiss Neolithic samples and the Italian and Greek Bronze Age samples were combined to make a “Prehistoric Mediterranean” twig. Then Naqada Bronze Age Egyptian, the Nubian, Nubia Bronze Age, Israeli Fellaheen (Arabic farmers) and Somali samples were lumped as “Prehistoric/Recent Northeast Africa.”
The Naqada predynastic Egyptian sample didn't cluster with "Medits", neither prehistoric nor modern, but the Berbers and other North Africans did. I rest my case.
|
|
king
Junior Member
Posts: 68
|
Post by king on Jan 19, 2006 13:48:13 GMT -5
This has got to be a joke. How much time does Planet Asia own Dienekes. It is really getting boring. Dienekes needs to give up on ancient Egypt and stick to Greece. Dieneks is embarassing him. Planet Asia is the one person on this forum who believes in a Black African egypt and he holds all the other posters at bay. I also like how Dienekes said the ancient egyptians and the nubians were a special kind of negroid that groups with caucasoid. This debate is over. Ancient Egyptians were Black African.
You should have been a cheerleader
|
|
|
Post by Soomaal on Jan 19, 2006 16:48:00 GMT -5
This has got to be a joke. How much time does Planet Asia own Dienekes. It is really getting boring. Dienekes needs to give up on ancient Egypt and stick to Greece. Dieneks is embarassing him. Planet Asia is the one person on this forum who believes in a Black African egypt and he holds all the other posters at bay. I also like how Dienekes said the ancient egyptians and the nubians were a special kind of negroid that groups with caucasoid. This debate is over. Ancient Egyptians were Black African. You should have been a cheerleaderLMAO @ cheerleader.
|
|
|
Post by Planet Asia on Jan 20, 2006 2:28:47 GMT -5
Dienekes calling someone a cheerleader, what about Crimson Fraud? Not that I'm taking up for King. Pontikos has no answers for my post, a sure sign that he's been owned.
|
|
|
Post by Dienekes on Jan 20, 2006 4:13:43 GMT -5
Answer for what? Brace and Irish have clearly demonstrated that when examing ancient skulls and teeth of Ancient Egyptians on non-adaptive traits they show no Negroid affinity but cluster with other Caucasoid (West Eurasian and North African) groups. Moreover, Egyptians clearly show an absence of Negroid Y chromosomes and a small incidence of Negroid mtDNA. Even if we neglect the slave trade and consider Negroid markers to be of prehistoric origin, it would still take a population replacement of enormous proportions to turn the Egyptian into its present-day form. Needless to say, there is no evidence whatsoever for massive population replacement in Egypt.
Those who dream of Somali-like ancient Egyptians, let alone Negroid-like ones are simply deluding themselves. Egyptians were/are a North African Mediterranean Caucasoid population.
|
|
|
Post by Ras-Xafun on Jan 20, 2006 8:07:29 GMT -5
Really, I guess they were Greek like, right? Instead of making statements based on your personal wishes, why dont you start adressing Brass well put argument? which was I'm sorry but no one here is deluding themselves, these are facts presented by authorities in the field of anthropology. I think it's high time for you to face reality and stop with you medcentrist agenda. Both modern and ancient greeks are not and were never closly related to Ancient Egyptians. However Egyptians were a saharan people(and neolithic saharans were closer to other SSA than any other population) who inturn had links to other people living around this region, they did not speak a indo-european language but an afro-asiatic language. So your claim of Egyptians being a meditteranian people is really laughable since you are pushing an identity on people who never percieved themselves as such. But I do agree that modern Egyptians are the only real descendants of Ancient Egyptians. But of course their physical appereance have been severly altered by all invading forces.
|
|
kibou
New Member
Posts: 15
|
Post by kibou on Jan 20, 2006 9:24:04 GMT -5
Is it possible to fully alter a nation's phenotype ? There are always rural and isolated populations who have remained "purer" ( Copts ? ).
|
|
|
Post by Arthur_Eld on Jan 20, 2006 9:30:33 GMT -5
That's not even a argument. Semitic languages just like berber languages are afro-asiatic, are the black? Language Race
|
|
|
Post by Ras-Xafun on Jan 20, 2006 12:34:11 GMT -5
That's not even a argument. Semitic languages just like berber languages are afro-asiatic, are the black? Language Race I know afro-asiatic speakers are not all black, i don't know where you got the black thing from. what i meant was that they did not speak an indo-european language, but an afro-asiatic language which is indeginious to the region. This so-called mediteranian race Imo is to broad and defined in a very simplistic way. There is not even a linguistic link.
|
|
|
Post by human2 on Jan 20, 2006 14:46:51 GMT -5
There is a lot of evidence that it's the Middle Easterners are adopted an African language.. to be fair.
|
|