|
Post by Planet Asia on Dec 21, 2005 5:49:13 GMT -5
Lets get down to business shall we? In Joel Irish's recent study Kharga and Lisht are outliers mostly and none on that dendogram you posted are predynastic Egyptians, Kharga dates to the Byzantine era and Lisht is Middle Kingdom era, El Hesa dates back to the Byzantine era, now please tell me how any of this refutes what I said about predynastic and early dynastic Upper egyptians being closer to Nubians?
|
|
|
Post by Ewig Berter on Dec 21, 2005 16:20:02 GMT -5
Atlantis, the only NEW infos/hard facts in that thread are those posted by DP. My advice: read them and ... save your time!.
Btw, *) Grimsonguard and I were the first to post that dendogram on the dental affinities of AEs to other pops; that was more than 1yr ago, we had extensive, flamed but sterile discussions with Bass and his afro-american band. Its all archived here in Dodona forum, dig them up and read them if that pleases you but dont waste your time and energy. **) Apparently, the only 'anthropolgical authority' in favore of Bass' claims is Keita ... and Keita is black!. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Dienekes on Dec 21, 2005 16:38:48 GMT -5
Lets get this correct Pontikos, Upper egyptians, predynastic and dynastic cluster closer to together than either cluster with Europeans for the fact that both were of the Elongated variety, Its not my fault that your mind only sees true Negroes as west and central Africans only. Of course Egyptians cluster together more closely than they do with Europeans. The point is that they are also closer to Europeans and Greeks than to Somalis. Aren't Somalis elongated enough for you So far, your line was that I compared Egyptians with West African Negroids, while they were more similar to East African "elongated" types, yet this assumption is not supported by Irish's observation that the mass-additive complex pattern is ubuiquitous in Sub-Saharans and it is not supported by Hanihara's PC plot, which clearly shows the affinity of Egyptians with Greeks and the great distance between them and all Negroid groups. Moreover, your own dendrogram does not place them together with Negroid groups, but with Caucasoid groups, and again supports my position that the Ancient Egyptians were essentially a Caucasoid people, not a Negroid one.
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Guard on Dec 21, 2005 23:16:20 GMT -5
Atlantis, the only NEW infos/hard facts in that thread are those posted by DP. My advice: read them and ... save your time!. Btw, *) Grimsonguard and I were the first to post that dendogram on the dental affinities of AEs to other pops; that was more than 1yr ago, we had extensive, flamed but sterile discussions with Bass and his afro-american band. Its all archived here in Dodona forum, dig them up and read them if that pleases you but dont waste your time and energy. **) Apparently, the only 'anthropolgical authority' in favore of Bass' claims is Keita ... and Keita is black!. ;D Yep exactly Berter !
|
|
|
Post by Planet Asia on Dec 22, 2005 1:28:22 GMT -5
Of course Egyptians cluster together more closely than they do with Europeans. The point is that they are also closer to Europeans and Greeks than to Somalis. Aren't Somalis elongated enough for you If you look at that dendogram I posted, the Egyptians clustered with Nubians, and its been the same with craniofacial and limb ratio studies, nothing you post can cnage that dental studies are but *ONE* line of evidence. Nubians are elongated types and they are Negroid, what do you not understand? Nubians are Negroid and Egyptians cluster closer to them than to any other group END OF STORY.
|
|
|
Post by Dienekes on Dec 22, 2005 5:06:12 GMT -5
Ok, Nubians and Egyptians were "Negroid", but the kind of "Negroid" that is more similar to Caucasoids and not the kind that is more similar to other Negroids such as Somalis.
|
|
|
Post by Planet Asia on Dec 22, 2005 5:17:45 GMT -5
Ok, Nubians and Egyptians were "Negroid", but the kind of "Negroid" that is more similar to Caucasoids and not the kind that is more similar to other Negroids such as Somalis. The elongated type type is not a Caucasoid and besides the elongatedness has nothing to do with teeth. fact is, you cannot say that the Egyptian samples didn't cluster with Negroid people since Nubians are Negroid and the Egyptian smaples in Irish's old studies and his new one are *NOT* the same since his new one has predynastic samples and a larger sample of Egyptians overall than his old ones.
|
|
Terp
New Member
Posts: 27
|
Post by Terp on Dec 22, 2005 15:52:33 GMT -5
dental studies are but *ONE* line of evidence. No, that's two lines of evidence: dental metric and dental non-metric. Hanihara & Ishida used linear measurements, and Irish used discrete features like cusps and shoveling. On top of that you have craniometric and cranial non-metric evidence pointing to the Caucasoid affiliation of ancient Egyptians.
|
|
Terp
New Member
Posts: 27
|
Post by Terp on Dec 22, 2005 15:57:10 GMT -5
how are you going to look solely at a dental study and ignore limb ratios It's well-known that limb ratios are not a good indicator of population relationships, as they're too dependent on environment. For example, high-altitude and low-altitude Andeans evolved different limb proportions in response to their different environments, even though they are essentially the same people. On climate and limb proportions: home.entouch.net/dmd/hybrid.htm This data is taken from a chart from page 92 of Stringer and Gamble (Stringer and Gamble, 1993, p. 92):. crural index = Tibia/Femur length Group | crural index | Mean annual temp C | Lapps | 79% | .25 | modern Inuit | 81.5% | 4 | Belgium | 82.5% | 10 | S.African white | 83.2% | 8.5 | Yugoslav | 83.75% | 8.4 | American white | 82.6% | 9.8 | Kalahari Bushman | 83.4% | 18 | New Mexico Indian | 84.6% | 14 | S.African black | 86.4% | 17 | Arizona Indian | 85.5% | 18 | Melanesian | 84.8% | 23 | Pygmy | 85.1% | 24.2 | Egyptian | 84.9% | 26.1 | American Black | 85.25% | 26 |
Running these numbers through Excel gives a high (0.82) correlation between crural index and mean annual temperature. So yes, Egyptians are relatively heat-adapted, but then so are Melanesians and Arizona Indians. Heat adaptation is by no means unique to sub-Saharan Africans.
|
|
Terp
New Member
Posts: 27
|
Post by Terp on Dec 22, 2005 16:00:44 GMT -5
Lol. Are you sure about that?
Irish, JD (1998). Dental morphological indications of population discontinuity and Egyptian gene flow in post-Paleolithic Nubia. In JR Lukacs (ed.) Human Dental Development, Morphology, & Pathology: A Tribute to Albert A. Dahlberg. University of Oregon Anthropological Papers 54. Eugene, OR: University of Oregon Press. pp. 155-172.
|
|
Terp
New Member
Posts: 27
|
Post by Terp on Dec 22, 2005 16:04:04 GMT -5
"Sub-Saharan Africa does not define/delimit authentic Africanity." LOL at "Authentic Africanity" What does "Authentic Africanity" mean, exactly, from a biological standpoint? Can you define "Authentic Africanity" without mentioning arbitrary geographic boundaries?
|
|
|
Post by tictactoe on Dec 23, 2005 4:26:26 GMT -5
This is why I never bothered with picking up on genetics...Even if Ethiopians cluster with Eurasians more than their black "cousins", why do they look more like their black "cousins" than they do Eurasians? some of them do, but many look striking european. The color of the skin isn't that important. Some Ethiopians even look like dark skinned northern euros. For my taste black supremacism is the most ridiculous of all.
|
|
|
Post by wadad on Dec 23, 2005 4:37:03 GMT -5
This is why I never bothered with picking up on genetics...Even if Ethiopians cluster with Eurasians more than their black "cousins", why do they look more like their black "cousins" than they do Eurasians? some of them do, but many look striking european. The color of the skin isn't that important. Some Ethiopians even look like dark skinned northern euros. For my taste black supremacism is the most ridiculous of all. Show me some pictures of these European Ethiopians you speak about...I'd like to see
|
|
|
Post by abdul2 on Dec 23, 2005 4:39:30 GMT -5
This is why I never bothered with picking up on genetics...Even if Ethiopians cluster with Eurasians more than their black "cousins", why do they look more like their black "cousins" than they do Eurasians? some of them do, but many look striking european. The color of the skin isn't that important. Some Ethiopians even look like dark skinned northern euros. For my taste black supremacism is the most ridiculous of all. dark skinned north euros, BS man i used to be dumb and thought that too but come on,EA"s are nothing like euros iman does not look north euro,skin color or not
|
|
|
Post by Planet Asia on Dec 23, 2005 4:43:07 GMT -5
dental studies are but *ONE* line of evidence. No, that's two lines of evidence: dental metric and dental non-metric. Hanihara & Ishida used linear measurements, and Irish used discrete features like cusps and shoveling. On top of that you have craniometric and cranial non-metric evidence pointing to the Caucasoid affiliation of ancient Egyptians. I've spoken to Brace via personal email communication and he doesn't believe Nubians nor Upper Egyptians affiliate with Caucasoids and he does believe they affiliate with Elongated types. Looking at that second plot, it groups Greeks with South Asians, Nubians with North Africans and Russians with central Asians, wow we can make a number of racial affilations based on that right?
|
|