|
Post by Said Mohammad on Jun 5, 2004 13:44:36 GMT -5
It has been assumed that Ethiopians are heavily mixed peoples. However upon closer look, the only Ethiopian group for whom a strong Middle Eastern component is reported are the Amhara, not Ethiopians proper. Read
It is worth noting that the frequency of group VI chromosomes in the Ethiopian Jews (just one chromosome out of 22) is similar to that reported for the p12f2 chromosomes in the Oromo from Ethiopia (4%) and is considerably lower than the frequency reported for the Amhara of the same region (33%), for whom a strong Middle Eastern genetic component has been reported (Semino et al. 2002). These data, together with those reported elsewhere (Ritte et al. 1993a, 1993b; Hammer et al. 2000) suggest that the Ethiopian Jews acquired their religion without substantial genetic admixture from Middle Eastern peoples and that they can be considered an ethnic group with essentially a continental African genetic composition .
Am. J. Hum. Genet., 70:1197-1214, 2002 A Back Migration from Asia to Sub-Saharan Africa Is Supported by High-Resolution Analysis of Human Y-Chromosome Haplotypes
As we can see, only the Amhara have a strong Middle Eastern component and not all Ethiopians, so the term "Ethiopid" has no basis in the sense that the "Ethiopid" racial type is the result of Negroids mixing with Middle Easterners, since the Oromo and Ethiopian Jews are NOT substantially mixed with Middle Easterners.
But a curious fact remains in terms of the physical features of the Oromo and Ethiopian Jews in that they don't necessarily differ from the Amhara that much. They often too have elongated features like thin noses, thin lips, and have various types of hair textures. With the above cited genetic information it is often incorrect suggest hybridsation is the reason for these physical features being found in east African populations. Because a group has a sizeable amount of admixture doesn't mean that that population will hybridize physically.
|
|
Afro
Full Member
Posts: 248
|
Post by Afro on Jun 5, 2004 16:43:10 GMT -5
I've always thought that some people would overexaggerate the level of Middle Eastern blood in Ethiopians for reasons racially charged.
|
|
|
Post by Said Mohammad on Jun 5, 2004 17:23:44 GMT -5
I've always thought that some people would overexaggerate the level of Middle Eastern blood in Ethiopians for reasons racially charged. People overexaggerate the levels of Middle Eastern blood in some Ethiopians as a means to explain culture and civilization in Ethiopia as well as using as it as an argument that East Africans are allegedy a separate race from West, Central, ansd southern Africans, ie, so-called "True Negroes" so-called Congoids. As we see, there is no genetic basis for this.
|
|
Afro
Full Member
Posts: 248
|
Post by Afro on Jun 5, 2004 17:35:17 GMT -5
People overexaggerate the levels of Middle Eastern blood in some Ethiopians as a means to explain culture and civilization in Ethiopia as well as using as it as an argument that East Africans are allegedy a separate race from West, Central, ansd southern Africans, ie, so-called "True Negroes" so-called Congoids. As we see, there is no genetic basis for this. Same way some people overexaggerate the level of white blood in African Americans, for the same reasons.
|
|
|
Post by Said Mohammad on Jun 5, 2004 18:22:39 GMT -5
Same way some people overexaggerate the level of white blood in African Americans, for the same reasons. Exactly, white nationalists have this kind of twisted thinking. Whats funny is that they think a drop of white in blacks makes blacks smart, but a drop of black blood dooms whole civilizations to barbarism. Their thinking is so simplistic.
|
|
|
Post by AWAR on Jun 5, 2004 19:57:46 GMT -5
Exactly, white nationalists have this kind of twisted thinking. Whats funny is that they think a drop of white in blacks makes blacks smart, but a drop of black blood dooms whole civilizations to barbarism. Their thinking is so simplistic. Yes, that's so ridiculous and stupid. There's so many inconsistencies in the writings of the head honchos of WN, one wouldn't know where to start. Unfortunately, they aren't the only ones who turn a blind eye to major inconsistencies and stupidities.
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on Jun 6, 2004 7:53:34 GMT -5
Awar, I thought this thread was a negro mind wank. Not a serious discussion.
The admixture in East Africans took place long before there was any a Middle East containing semitic speaking people that is in the Prehistoric. Looking for markers of existing modern Middle Eastern people in existing modern East Africans is stupid. What do those f*ckers have to do with the prehistoric folks who contributed their genes to ancient East Africans. These ancient folks could have wandered off to Manchuria. What on earth makes you think they lingered in the Middle East or that they contributed any genes to the present population of Arabia? There are lots of stupid assumptions there. Not very logical and the basis of the study is flawed because of it. Trust that rootless, illegimate humanoid to bring it up trying to prove yet another crock theory of his.
Afro, you seem to be a nice person, but if you don't want to accept your heritage, your white and red heritage, you will never be whole. Your black side may be 90% of you, rejecting your other sides is hating yourself. Personally I think Afro-Americans are like orphans, rootless and belong nowhere to nobody. That probably explains the blackwashing of history and the blackening of non negroid races, the Afrocentrist viewpoint.
Afrocentricism is just as offensive, racist and stupid as those white nationalists you are decrying. Can't you see how hypocritical you are and how aping of white nationalists you have become. Why not go all the way and form a negro KKK? Some Afro-Americans have already gone part of the way with the adoption of Islam, the use of Arabic names belonging to caucasians, the use of ethnic African dress, the falsifying of Egyptian and North African history and the denial of their caucasian/NA admixture. I doubt that any of those negroes from Angola were muslim, and how do you know where your ancestors or what your ancestors believed? You don't!
|
|
|
Post by Silveira on Jun 6, 2004 9:47:41 GMT -5
I agree totally. Instead of accepting their own unique culture which developed in the US, many black Americans feel the need to identify with Africans from Africa with which they have very little in common other than skin colour. What is even worse, bordering on insanity, is when black American "scholars" attempt to paint mostly caucasian North African civilizations as being the product of black African "genius". Culturally, Afro-Americans are basically a variant of the North American Anglo-Saxon culture, which incidentally also has a white branch known as the "WASPS" but which in reality includes people of various (mostly northern) European ethnic origins, often mixed in varying proportions. Many of the latter also have a very distorted view of the cultural diversity which exists in Europe. They think that because people in Europe look like them Europe is basically the same as the USA.
|
|
|
Post by AWAR on Jun 6, 2004 10:12:55 GMT -5
Awar, I thought this thread was a negro mind wank. Not a serious discussion. Well, I don't know mostly anything about Ethiopian DNA, so I wanted to see if someone else would contribute a good counter-argument. I tend to agree with this. That's also a very sad truth. That's one of the major ironies of history. The Muslims were the ones catching and selling black ( and other ) slaves and selling them to European traders. Islamic presence in Africa wiped out all the indigenous African cultures, many of the traces of indigenous Black and other African civilizations were destroyed, tribal cultures erased to make way for Islamic globalization. Today Blacks in USA think of Islam in a romanticized manner, unknowing of it's role in their slavery and historical misfortune.
|
|
|
Post by Silveira on Jun 6, 2004 10:17:51 GMT -5
In fact, there exists some historical continuity between the Portuguese African slave trade which commenced in the 1400s and the trans-Saharan Arab slave trade, with which the Portuguese (and other Iberians) had contact with since the days of Moorish domination. This lucrative trade, dominated by the Arabs, was one of the factors which originally lured the Portuguese to explore the African coast. Therefore, the Islamic/Arabic culture which these guys so admire was one of the causes of their eventual enslavement by Europeans.
|
|
Afro
Full Member
Posts: 248
|
Post by Afro on Jun 6, 2004 12:28:58 GMT -5
Afro, you seem to be a nice person, but if you don't want to accept your heritage, your white and red heritage, you will never be whole. Your black side may be 90% of you, rejecting your other sides is hating yourself. Personally I think Afro-Americans are like orphans, rootless and belong nowhere to nobody. That probably explains the blackwashing of history and the blackening of non negroid races, the Afrocentrist viewpoint.
I've said this before, no one is denying that Black Americans may RACIALLY have some caucasian blood, thats appearent.
But we are still our own group separate, I consider Black Americans a separate ethnic group, separate from other Americans and other Africans.
Being Black and Being Negroid are two separate things, especially in America.
Either way, racially, we still are not like a Brazil or Puerto Rico!
Afrocentricism is just as offensive, racist and stupid as those white nationalists you are decrying. Can't you see how hypocritical you are and how aping of white nationalists you have become. Why not go all the way and form a negro KKK? Some Afro-Americans have already gone part of the way with the adoption of Islam, the use of Arabic names belonging to caucasians, the use of ethnic African dress, the falsifying of Egyptian and North African history and the denial of their caucasian/NA admixture. I doubt that any of those negroes from Angola were muslim, and how do you know where your ancestors or what your ancestors believed? You don't!
I am not an Afrocentrist, but I definitely don't believe everything some of these scientist and history books tell us either. Whats that quote "History is written by the conquerors"?
I DO believe that Caucasian blood in Ethiopians is exaggerated alot sometimes, I've heard numbers as high as 40 Percent Arab blood and those are the kind of things I question.
I've never been one to argue about Egypt, the way I see it the population of Egypt now is mostly Arab with a small black population so I see no reason to believe it was any different back then. I do know that there has been some (Maybe even documented I'm not sure) cases of Europeans re-chizzling sculptures and such to give them more caucazoid appearences.
And white people do there share of "Whitening" history, blond haired blue eye Jesus? Pale skin virgin Mary?
Pretty soon, white people will be saying that Japan "has caucasian admixture" which is the reason for there high level of culture.
That's one of the major ironies of history. The Muslims were the ones catching and selling black ( and other ) slaves and selling them to European traders.
Islamic presence in Africa wiped out all the indigenous African cultures, many of the traces of indigenous Black and other African civilizations were destroyed, tribal cultures erased to make way for Islamic globalization.
Today Blacks in USA think of Islam in a romanticized manner, unknowing of it's role in their slavery and historical misfortune.
I agree with you guys on this part, to many brothers think that Islam is "good" or something. I always tell every black person I know when the discussion of slavery or Islam comes up that "ARABS STARTED SSAFRICAN SLAVE TRADE AND CONTINUE TO DO IT TODAY". Arabs are also the most racist I believe, when walking through the mall and city and such its these middle easteners and Asians giving me hard looks, not white people.
|
|
|
Post by Vitor on Jun 6, 2004 12:49:22 GMT -5
Osahma bin laden is even more racist than Hitler ever was!
|
|
|
Post by alex221166 on Jun 6, 2004 13:08:53 GMT -5
To Afro:
I am not an Afrocentrist, but I definitely don't believe everything some of these scientist and history books tell us either. Whats that quote "History is written by the conquerors"?
You shouldn't believe everything in the history books. What you should do is search for accurate information about what the defeated peoples said about the "conquerors". Many history books are biased, but then again, so is Afrocentrism.
I do know that there has been some (Maybe even documented I'm not sure) cases of Europeans re-chizzling sculptures and such to give them more caucazoid appearences.
That is the first time I heard anything of the sort. I do know that in Pompey, the Europeans painted over some of the nudes and phalic paintings they found. The nose of the Sphinx was destroyed not by Europeans, but by an Arab Muslim (circa 1400).
And white people do there share of "Whitening" history, blond haired blue eye Jesus? Pale skin virgin Mary?
That doesn't make sense. I could show you a black Mary, an Amerindian Mary, an Indo-Portuguese Mary, or a Japanese Mary. That same goes for Jesus. The Jesuits always painted Jesus and the Virgin of the same race as the colonised populations. As such, this last comment of yours doesn't make much sense given the fact that America is mainly a northern European "colony".
|
|
|
Post by Melnorme on Jun 6, 2004 13:18:59 GMT -5
but by an Arab Muslim (circa 1400). I think Turks did that.
|
|
|
Post by AWAR on Jun 6, 2004 14:49:33 GMT -5
I've said this before, no one is denying that Black Americans may RACIALLY have some caucasian blood, thats appearent. Let's see what Said will say about this. Sure, but nobody can erase or alter ALL traces of real history. If there were large numbers of Negroids from ancient times in Europe or Egypt, somebody would have found them. It's not like there are groups of black archaeologists doing any researches on the spot anywhere... that leads me to the conclusion that the heads of afrocentrist thought KNOW that they're bullshitting. If their or nordicist preaches weren't bullshit, at least, they'd finance some real archaeological excavations, not just bookworming. I bet that Afrocentrists and Nordicist pseudo-historians made much of their texts with the help of google, entering the words BLONDE or BLACK and GREEK or EGYPTIAN. I think Ethiopids are a separate race, not a mixture. The original population wasn't Arab speaking. The remnants of the unmixed Egyptians still exist in the form of christian Copts. Do a search on them. I doubt that. The statues' face surface would then appear much 'younger' than the rest of the body. An independent laboratory could do the testing. Also, any sculptor can tell you about how much material it is needed to chisel a figure or especially a head. I think that Negroid heads are much smaller than those of caucasoids, and the proportions are different. Negroids have much longer limbs, while Mongoloids have shorter and even larger heads. Any Greek or Roman sculpture is proportioned like Caucasoids, not any other race. Every race has it's retarded members. You speak about white people, when in fact, it's just a minority who even thinks about this things, even less people actually say anything about it, even less do researches about it, and even less of them are foolish enough to write such stupidities. Arthur Kemp already said this. ;D He doesn't count. People in USA, black and white have a lot of wrong ideas, and are generally on the wrong track. In fact, most of you guys remind me somehow of Bosnians. Not the complete mentality, but some. The worst parts. Need I remind you of what happened in Bosnia.
|
|