|
Post by Said Mohammad on Jun 12, 2004 2:17:57 GMT -5
A black african from the west is a lot different from another one in the east (let we classify that difference with a number...10) ! It all depends on which groups you compare
|
|
|
Post by Vitor on Jun 12, 2004 2:18:22 GMT -5
Genetic isn't race. How else do you explain Melenesians and Black Africans? they look alike but are the fartherest apart genetically. They do look apart!
|
|
|
Post by Said Mohammad on Jun 12, 2004 2:20:56 GMT -5
They do look apart! they do not in most cases, they have the same traits and are almost indistinguishable.
|
|
|
Post by geirr on Jun 12, 2004 5:57:40 GMT -5
they do not in most cases, they have the same traits and are almost indistinguishable. Can you stop using different user names, it's confusing.
|
|
|
Post by Said Mohammad on Jun 12, 2004 7:14:43 GMT -5
Can you stop using different user names, it's confusing. Ok kid, but do you have some kind of a point you want to make here?
|
|
|
Post by geirr on Jun 12, 2004 7:51:17 GMT -5
Ok kid, but do you have some kind of a point you want to make here? I'l be clearer, I don't think changing your user name everytime Graeme or anyone else kicks your arse will help reclaim your credibility.
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on Jun 12, 2004 9:53:23 GMT -5
Friends, not you Said every name, I don't want you to accept the BS of Said, for example:
Melanesians These people who come in shades of brown and black and have woolly hair and thick lips are not African negroes and do not look like African negroes. Take it from me, I live in Oceania and know Papua/New Guinea, the Solomons, Fiji... the people of Melanesia look very different to African negroes. I will tell you a story, I was training some Papuans in my home city and while showing them around the city some negroes came past and did some sort of acknowledgement to the Papuans, a brother thing. I said to these Papuans, why did those negroes do that, and they said, that American negroes cannot tell melanesians from African negroes. Do you know why? It is because American negroes are a mixed/mestee/mongrel group and they have lots of differing phenotypes that can pass for other races or sub races. That deludes them to think that Berbers, Egyptians and Nilotids are negroes because they are darker than Europeans.
Tutsis and Hutus These African people who live in the same countries of Rwanda and Burundi are not of the same race. The Tutsis are Nilotids and are tall, linear in build with distinctive features. The Hutus are Bantu negroes who are about 10 centimetres shorter than Tutsis and have negro features and stocky builds. For Said to say that they are the same race is totally ignorant and proves that he is not well read or travelled to that part of Africa. That is the trouble with a lot of racists; they don't travel to those countries which they claim to know what the natives look like.
|
|
|
Post by Igu on Jun 12, 2004 19:07:59 GMT -5
It's not what I meant, we just feel it from your posts not read it. so reject with it caucasoid and mongloid. are you trying to say that races don't exist? yes and this guy is a mongloid just as bruce-lee is. yes, and portuguese people are heterogenous people of many different phenotypes from Proto-Midean to tropical African looking with their 4% negroid blood(because north africans have 8% of negroid blood.) So far, our analyses have allowed a clear dissection of almost all NW African...paternal lineages into several components with distinct historical origins. In this way, the historical origins of the NW African Y-chromosome pool may be summarized as follows: 75% NW African Upper Paleolithic (H35, H36, and H38), 13% Neolithic (H58 and H71), 4% historic European gene flow (group IX, H50, H52), and 8% recent sub-Saharan African (H22 and H28). (Bosch et al., Am J Hum Genet, 2001) Anyway, you're trying to play with terms, the "many different phenotypes" are at 92% caucasoid. Please, don't make me appear to be racist, 60% of my friends in south africa are blacks, it's easy to say "malice". I will tell you something, north africans are genetically and culturally closer to Europeans than to negroids whether you like it or not. and this doesn't mean that i have malice against negroids nor does it mean that a black cannot be closer to me in friendship than a white. Even though Syria is in asia, syrians are genetically and culturally closer to europeans than to chinese people. these are just facts, what you are trying to do is to shemale the reality for your phantasmagoric "big africa". it's totally different, white americans are praising civilization as they would praise the egyptian civilisation, so it's not because of race. secondly, they can be proud of what europeans did because they have a EUROPEAN culture and not because of race. Blacks (americans) on the other hand have the SAME culture as whites, I didn't say they don't have culture. The arabs who live in north africa are arabs not berbers even if they have no arab ancestry, they have lost their culture and language to adopt other costums so they are arabs but it doesn't mean that they have no culture you just understand words in an offensive way.
|
|
|
Post by Igu on Jun 12, 2004 19:19:48 GMT -5
there is not such thing as pure race... Here I agree with you! But berbers are not black africans...IF they are, then there is no such thing as white race, or even mongolian race for that matter... The majority of western europeans have a berber ancestor. believe it or not, the Rhesus negative people came from the marrocan atlas mountains, and spread thoughout europe. This people from the atlas is allmoust all RH negative. 40% of western europeans is carrying this gene (a recessive gene most europeans are still positive but 40% carry this gene, 15% are negative), some africans do also, but there are very few sub-saharan with it. the mutation ocured somewhere in marrocos, and jumped into Iberia and from here to all europe. Of course might be the other way around, from Iberia to marrocos, nevertheless the high volume of RH negative in atlas is proof enough this mutation don't come from sub-sahara region...because europeans also have that... so regartheless the prespective berbers are White! This only happened 10k-12k years ago more or less, not that time ago! btw I am RH negative! Your perspective is simple... there is no race at all. and we are all tropical africans ! I also noticed that portuguese looks like many north africans, I thought that they had north african genes but in the web-site of racial reality, it says that there is no berber blood in iberia (Or among basques, I forgot).
|
|
|
Post by Vitor on Jun 12, 2004 23:20:24 GMT -5
By my calculation portuguese have from 15 to 25% of those typical middle east genes, half what there are in Italy and less even than in Greece, the proportion of those genetic markers are halfway between greece proportions and marrocan berber proportions, so It's dificult to know how much of that berber blood we have... I believe we have some of those, but spain have much more, their's eastern genes have the same proportion of the berbers proportions, so it's easier to know where that came from... Here is what I mean: We have too much of that Hg9 genes... look marrrocan berbers only have a litlle a tiny fraction of the portuguese. If those hg9 came from the marrocan berbers we should have a lot more H21. The way I see it we have less northern african marrocan blood than the spanish... altough spanish have less of those genes, it's easier to say that allmoust all of these were from marrocan berber north africa. Maybe We got more greek/phoenecian/roman influences...Don't know... Or we have algerian berberian not morrocan berber blood, strange, morrocos is closer.
|
|
|
Post by Vitor on Jun 12, 2004 23:37:07 GMT -5
another interesting stuff is that even dutch have those same genes...(half what portuguese have)
At similar proportion between the 2 (Hg9, aHg21), altough we have a little more of that Hg21, so mourish invasion did do something, but I believe it had less inpact than in spain.
I bet this are really ancient genes and arrived into europe a long time ago...(only because the dutch also have those genes).
|
|
|
Post by Said Mohammad on Jun 13, 2004 12:33:24 GMT -5
Friends, not you Said every name, I don't want you to accept the BS of Said, for example: Melanesians These people who come in shades of brown and black and have woolly hair and thick lips are not African negroes and do not look like African negroes. Take it from me, I live in Oceania and know Papua/New Guinea, the Solomons, Fiji... the people of Melanesia look very different to African negroes. I will tell you a story, I was training some Papuans in my home city and while showing them around the city some negroes came past and did some sort of acknowledgement to the Papuans, a brother thing. I said to these Papuans, why did those negroes do that, and they said, that American negroes cannot tell melanesians from African negroes. Do you know why? It is because American negroes are a mixed/mestee/mongrel group and they have lots of differing phenotypes that can pass for other races or sub races. That deludes them to think that Berbers, Egyptians and Nilotids are negroes because they are darker than Europeans. if i posted pics of Melanesians and black Africans you could not tell the difference this is noting more than early 20th century racist thinking from colonists who thought Tutsis to more akin to Europeans and hutu as less. Both groups are 'bantus' and bantu is not a racial term, but a linguistic one. I have already posted proof to confirm this you idiot.
|
|
|
Post by Vitor on Jun 13, 2004 12:40:02 GMT -5
Why not...
|
|
|
Post by geirr on Jun 14, 2004 8:14:21 GMT -5
if i posted pics of Melanesians and black Africans you could not tell the difference I would say that outside Australia that could be true but most Australians would be able to tell the difference.
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on Jun 14, 2004 9:14:10 GMT -5
Said I wouldn't put anything past you. Duplicity, Lying, murder, incest... anything. I could post, like some others have, pictures of people from various countries, nationalities, ethnic groups and races and misrepresent them in order to fulfil some agenda. In your case the negrocentric viewpoint. I would never do that. But you would.
|
|