|
Post by asdf on Nov 7, 2005 21:34:35 GMT -5
Hey genius , what are these nigerians doing with lighter skin? Maybe do to "caucasoid" influence I suppose? I hate ignorant people. LOL. Now with the advent of the internet they can be anonymously ignorant. Like I haven't messed with you before. Go look up the very narrow term negrid. It doesn't make room for mixed or intermediate people. You never did come up with that comparison of Black women and White women and Black men and Black women in the UK.
|
|
|
Post by Miguel Antunes on Nov 8, 2005 4:30:14 GMT -5
King...Semitic peoples...something that doesn´t mean anything but I presume you are talking about Arabs and Levantines..they´re caucasian...there´s no doubt about it...and the mixture that ocurred between South Arabia and East Africa was even before semitic languages existed I think like during the Kingdom of Axum or Saba...although it also happened after...during Arabic/Muslim expansion...
|
|
|
Post by magneto on Nov 8, 2005 6:52:17 GMT -5
Syrian, Nubian, Libyan, and Egyptian. ...Im not one of those people think Egyptians on the whole were black but I think some were.Also everyone knows that Amharas avg like 40% caucasian blood but from what I've read Somalis have no where near that.I think I read something like around 15%. WTF? So having redish skins makes one black? that's odd... The evidence against a predominantly negroid AE is given by the AE...they did not depicted themselves as other black african....they had redish skin tone...although women sometimes were yellowish...with straight noses, small lips and at best curly hair....have you ever seen a black person like this? I have...a black person with a lot of white blood...therefore not being black at all! Not really..Fulanis are said to have reddish brown skin with "caucasian" features but even when some people have claimed them to be caucasians or highly mixed peoples to explain their appearance,no genetic evidence has supported it.These people are Negroid/Black.
|
|
|
Post by magneto on Nov 8, 2005 7:07:59 GMT -5
You should be arguing that the AE's were Aethiopids as that's the most Europiform black African group out there. To say that they were Negroid in the sense of West-Central African is ridiculous. One look at the murals of the Egyptians side by side with the Nubians and other foreigners confirms this. Aethiopid is a much more modest claim because it's more difficult to refute. Obviously no similarity there... but here: Now that's a different story altogether. It's more difficult to tell the difference between Aethiopids and Mediterranoids than it is between Nilotids and Mediterranoids. It could go either way, depending on your point of view. I reserve judgement. I agree with you on this but I don't think it's that hard to tell the difference betwen a med person and a Horner if you're looking right at them.I acknowledge that people like Amhara have caucasian ancestry but at the same time you can see that they lean more to the negroid side which is predominant.Also remember that the Amhara is just 1 type of Aethiopid and probably the most mixed one.
|
|
king
Junior Member
Posts: 68
|
Post by king on Nov 8, 2005 9:00:56 GMT -5
Listen praetorian I understand where you are coming from. But I still have a hard time believing that This mixing was a big as people make it out to be. I don't really think that the caucasoid blood in east afriac is really that much. I could be wrong but I am going to do a little reasearch and get back to you praetorian. Thanks for giving me some hints on where to start.
|
|
king
Junior Member
Posts: 68
|
Post by king on Nov 8, 2005 12:13:38 GMT -5
Modern geneticists do not describe DNA according to race typologies. There is no caucasoid and negroid blood. Often on the internet you find references to outdated genetic studies or more current studies that are distorted, often re-written, with these terms inserted into them. These folks are distorting. East Africa has had gene flow from the Middle-East. About 2,000 BCE peoples from southern Arabia mainly the Sabaeans migrated to Eritrea and northeast Ethiopia. These immigrants mixed with the indigenous people and their modern-day descendants are the Amhara and Tigre. The Amhara are the dominant ethnic group of Ethiopia but they are not the majority. There are still plenty of 'pure' African Ethiopians about like the Oromo who are the majority and others like Agau, Afar, Sidamo. Did you know that the early Semitic speakers in Yemen came from the Horn? This is why Semitic is only a linguistic term and not a racial classification. Plus the early populations that lived in the Persian Gulf were not even Arabic. I guess semetic does not equal race. From what I gathered east africans do not have caucasoid ancestry. What they do have is The Amhara, the 2nd largest group in Ethiopia have signficant West Asian paternal ancestry denoted by Haplogroup J at 33%.The largest native East African ethnic group, the Oromo, have little J [Asiatic/Semitic] ancestry at less than 5%.
In more recent historical times the Aksumite under the leadership of Abreha ruled and controlled Yemen . Habesha[Ethiopian] mercenaries in Makkah before the birth of Muhammed out numbered the bedouins that lived there. This is all I could find so far does anybody have any comments?
|
|
king
Junior Member
Posts: 68
|
Post by king on Nov 8, 2005 17:21:55 GMT -5
Nobody has anything to say at all? What I said about ethiopia is right.
|
|
|
Post by asdf on Nov 8, 2005 17:32:49 GMT -5
Modern geneticists do not describe DNA according to race typologies. There is no caucasoid and negroid blood. Often on the internet you find references to outdated genetic studies or more current studies that are distorted, often re-written, with these terms inserted into them. These folks are distorting. East Africa has had gene flow from the Middle-East. About 2,000 BCE peoples from southern Arabia mainly the Sabaeans migrated to Eritrea and northeast Ethiopia. These immigrants mixed with the indigenous people and their modern-day descendants are the Amhara and Tigre. The Amhara are the dominant ethnic group of Ethiopia but they are not the majority. There are still plenty of 'pure' African Ethiopians about like the Oromo who are the majority and others like Agau, Afar, Sidamo. Did you know that the early Semitic speakers in Yemen came from the Horn? This is why Semitic is only a linguistic term and not a racial classification. Plus the early populations that lived in the Persian Gulf were not even Arabic. I guess semetic does not equal race. From what I gathered east africans do not have caucasoid ancestry. What they do have is The Amhara, the 2nd largest group in Ethiopia have signficant West Asian paternal ancestry denoted by Haplogroup J at 33%.The largest native East African ethnic group, the Oromo, have little J [Asiatic/Semitic] ancestry at less than 5%. In more recent historical times the Aksumite under the leadership of Abreha ruled and controlled Yemen . Habesha[Ethiopian] mercenaries in Makkah before the birth of Muhammed out numbered the bedouins that lived there. This is all I could find so far does anybody have any comments? Haplogroup J is caucasoid. What are you talking about?
|
|
king
Junior Member
Posts: 68
|
Post by king on Nov 8, 2005 20:02:08 GMT -5
Haplogroup J is Asiatic/Semitic
|
|
king
Junior Member
Posts: 68
|
Post by king on Nov 8, 2005 20:22:11 GMT -5
let me clarify Amharas have 33% Haplogroup J. They are the most mixed people in east africa. The rest of east africa is pure african. If I am wrong prove to me that I am wrong. They have asiatic/semitic ancestry. not caucasoid. Show me that Haplogroup J is caucasoid. If It is valid proof then I will change my stance. Either way the amharas are really the only real mixed people in east africa. I also think the tigre have the same amount of ancestry. If I am wrong with what I am saying prove that I am wrong.
|
|
king
Junior Member
Posts: 68
|
Post by king on Nov 8, 2005 21:33:24 GMT -5
This website explains a little that Haplogroup J is semetic I hope it helps you understand why Haplogroup J in ethiopia is asiatic/semetic. You may have to read a bit. www.jogg.info/coffman.htmread from:The DNA Evidence for Israelite Ancestry: The Jewish Priests and Cohanim DNA Study
|
|
|
Post by anodyne on Nov 8, 2005 21:38:44 GMT -5
I promised myself I wouldn't get involved in this again but I have to.. just for this one post. Semites are Caucasoids, King.
And why can't you just modify your post rather than posting 4 new ones?
|
|
|
Post by asdf on Nov 8, 2005 23:52:04 GMT -5
Haplogroup J is Asiatic/Semitic I repeat, Haplogroup J is Caucasoid. Your terms are geographical and linguistic. They're irrelevant.
|
|
|
Post by Matrix Reloaded on Nov 9, 2005 0:42:15 GMT -5
Modern geneticists do not describe DNA according to race typologies. There is no caucasoid and negroid blood. Often on the internet you find references to outdated genetic studies or more current studies that are distorted, often re-written, with these terms inserted into them. These folks are distorting. East Africa has had gene flow from the Middle-East. About 2,000 BCE peoples from southern Arabia mainly the Sabaeans migrated to Eritrea and northeast Ethiopia. These immigrants mixed with the indigenous people and their modern-day descendants are the Amhara and Tigre. The Amhara are the dominant ethnic group of Ethiopia but they are not the majority. There are still plenty of 'pure' African Ethiopians about like the Oromo who are the majority and others like Agau, Afar, Sidamo. Did you know that the early Semitic speakers in Yemen came from the Horn? This is why Semitic is only a linguistic term and not a racial classification. Plus the early populations that lived in the Persian Gulf were not even Arabic. I guess semetic does not equal race. From what I gathered east africans do not have caucasoid ancestry. What they do have is The Amhara, the 2nd largest group in Ethiopia have signficant West Asian paternal ancestry denoted by Haplogroup J at 33%.The largest native East African ethnic group, the Oromo, have little J [Asiatic/Semitic] ancestry at less than 5%. In more recent historical times the Aksumite under the leadership of Abreha ruled and controlled Yemen . Habesha[Ethiopian] mercenaries in Makkah before the birth of Muhammed out numbered the bedouins that lived there. This is all I could find so far does anybody have any comments? Haplogroup J is caucasoid. What are you talking about? I agree with king, haplogroup J isn't Caucasoid, no lineage is “Caucasoid”, racial typologies shouldn’t be applied to genetics. On the opposite side of the Red Sea in Yemen you do have non-Caucasoid looking people who show a slope towards the Abyssinian type in East Africa and are very dark. J is a lineage of Southwest Asian origin and that’s about that can be concluded from that.
|
|
|
Post by Matrix Reloaded on Nov 9, 2005 1:33:34 GMT -5
Hey genius , what are these nigerians doing with lighter skin? Maybe do to "caucasoid" influence I suppose? I hate ignorant people. LOL. Now with the advent of the internet they can be anonymously ignorant. Like I haven't messed with you before. Go look up the very narrow term negrid. It doesn't make room for mixed or intermediate people. You never did come up with that comparison of Black women and White women and Black men and Black women in the UK. Negrid is an invalid term. Sub-Saharan Africans have many gradations and intermediate looking people, there is no one discrete sub-Saharan type or "Negrid" phenotype. The so-called “Aethiopoid” is just one of the many gradations of sub-Saharan Africans.
|
|