I need proof that the Ancient Egyptia...

Level 2

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#24853 Jul 3, 2014
Gmoney AKA Big G wrote:
<quoted text>
Exactly.... The group arose in Africa, it spread out into Asia. They can't admit that because that would make the descendants of m and N which are all over Asia and Europe Afroasiatic groups instead of Eurasian which even with out that being the case, the early migrators were definitely Afroasiatic.
They were not 'Africans', they were already evolving into None Africans=Eurasians and seperated from Africans before they even spread out across Eurasia. In fact genetic studies show that ALL Eurasians are more closely related to each other and equally removed from Africans, while Africans clearly separate from ALL NONE AFRICANS and make cluster groups of their own.

Read:

"A PCA using all samples clearly separates Africans from the rest of the world along both axes (figure available on request)." ~ The Andaman Islanders in a Regional Genetic

Read:

"The most prominent feature of the genetic distances in this study is the SPLIT between sub-Saharan African and non-African populations" ~ Genetic Variation Among World Populations: Inferences From 100 Alu Insertion Polymorphisms

Read:

"The comparison of haplotype variation among populations supports a single out-of-Africa migration event and suggests that the founding population of Eurasia may have been relatively large BUT ISOLATED FROM AFRICANS Africans for a period of time. Note that PC 1 accounts for nearly eight times as much variation as PC 2. This speaks to the African vs. non-African gap."

Pay Attention to what Is posted above and below:

"A more likely explanation for the OoA bottleneck is that Eurasia was populated by a larger population that had been relatively isolated from other modern human populations for tens of thousands of years prior to the expansion. The first fossil evidence for modern humans outside of Africa is in the Middle East at Skhul and Qafzeh between 80,000-100,000 years ago, which is at least 20,000 years prior to the Eurasian diaspora. If a population of modern humans remained in the Middle East until the expansion into Eurasia, there would have been sufficient time for genetic drift to reduce heterozygosity dramatically before the Eurasia expansion. This “Middle East isolation” hypothesis provides a robust explanation for the relative homogeneity of European and Asian populations relative to African populations (see Figures 3A-B) and is supported by a recent maximum likelihood estimate of 140,000 years ago for the time of EURASIAN-WEST AFRICAN populations separation. Interestingly, a recent study of the Neandertal genome suggests that the non-African individuals, but not the Africans, contain similar amount of admixture (1-4%) with the Neandertals . The authors suggest that the admixture must have happened between the Neandertals with an ancestral non-African population before the Eurasian expansion. Given the fossil, archaeological, and genetic evidence, the Middle East isolation hypothesis warrants rigorous evaluation as whole-genome sequence data become available." ~ Toward a more uniform sampling of human genetic diversity: a survey of worldwide populations by high-density genotyping.,
trollslayer

Crown Point, IN

#24854 Jul 3, 2014
Insect Trust wrote:
<quoted text>
In fact, cretin, archaeological and, derived from it, genetic evidence confirms that where Egyptian civilization began-.
just LINK IT. No More meaningless essays. just LINK IT.
asho

Eskilstuna, Sweden

#24855 Jul 3, 2014
Eric456 wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh please, Afrocentric nonsense from an Afrocentric site. The first Europeans did not look anything like West Africans, in fact Sub Saharan Africans had the least similarities to Paleolithic Europeans, while Northern Europeans had the closest similarities to Paleolithic Europeans both genetically as well as craniofacial.
First Europeans already had features that Paleolithic Africans did not have. So no the first Europeans did not have an 'uncanny' resembles to any West Africans. Nice try though.
"Afrocentrists" are not behind this reconstruction of 40,000 year old skull found in europe.

https://m.youtube.com/watch...
trollslayer

Crown Point, IN

#24856 Jul 3, 2014
Insect Trust wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong as always, gaydummy.
Diverity in EURasia indicates place of origin.
M is EURasian, boy. Learn to live with that fact.
We all know what? Really... just spit it out, your entire NOI Nazi philosophy. Let's hear it, scum.
Gmoney AKA Big G wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't provide facts nor do you know anything about facts you flip flopping fool. Facts are non-existent when talking to you.
TRUTH

....he continues to NOT follow the rules we are taught in Eng. 101 ( support assertions/opinions with authority & attribution.)
trollslayer

Crown Point, IN

#24857 Jul 3, 2014
Eric456 wrote:
<quoted text>
They were not 'Africans', they were already evolving into None Africans=Eurasians and seperated from Africans before they even spread out across Eurasia. In fact genetic studies show that ALL Eurasians are more closely related to each other and equally removed from Africans, while Africans clearly separate from ALL NONE AFRICANS and make cluster groups of their own.
Read:
"A PCA using all samples clearly separates Africans from the rest of the world along both axes (figure available on request)." ~ The Andaman Islanders in a Regional Genetic
Read:
"The most prominent feature of the genetic distances in this study is the SPLIT between sub-Saharan African and non-African populations" ~ Genetic Variation Among World Populations: Inferences From 100 Alu Insertion Polymorphisms
Read:
"The comparison of haplotype variation among populations supports a single out-of-Africa migration event and suggests that the founding population of Eurasia may have been relatively large BUT ISOLATED FROM AFRICANS Africans for a period of time. Note that PC 1 accounts for nearly eight times as much variation as PC 2. This speaks to the African vs. non-African gap."
Pay Attention to what Is posted above and below:
"A more likely explanation for the OoA bottleneck is that Eurasia was populated by a larger population that had been relatively isolated from other modern human populations for tens of thousands of years prior to the expansion. The first fossil evidence for modern humans outside of Africa is in the Middle East at Skhul and Qafzeh between 80,000-100,000 years ago, which is at least 20,000 years prior to the Eurasian diaspora. If a population of modern humans remained in the Middle East until the expansion into Eurasia, there would have been sufficient time for genetic drift to reduce heterozygosity dramatically before the Eurasia expansion. This “Middle East isolation” hypothesis provides a robust explanation for the relative homogeneity of European and Asian populations relative to African populations (see Figures 3A-B) and is supported by a recent maximum likelihood estimate of 140,000 years ago for the time of EURASIAN-WEST AFRICAN populations separation. Interestingly, a recent study of the Neandertal genome suggests that the non-African individuals, but not the Africans, contain similar amount of admixture (1-4%) with the Neandertals . The authors suggest that the admixture must have happened between the Neandertals with an ancestral non-African population before the Eurasian expansion. Given the fossil, archaeological, and genetic evidence, the Middle East isolation hypothesis warrants rigorous evaluation as whole-genome sequence data become available." ~ Toward a more uniform sampling of human genetic diversity: a survey of worldwide populations by high-density genotyping.,
maybe you missed this vid:

First Out of Africa - The totally isolated Tribe of the Andaman

this film reveals how modern DNA analysis suggests that these ancient people have close links to Africa, from where they have been separated for 100,000 years

http://www.google.com/url...

-----

sigh......case closed

Level 2

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#24858 Jul 3, 2014
asho wrote:
<quoted text>
"Afrocentrists" are not behind this reconstruction of 40,000 year old skull found in europe.
https://m.youtube.com/watch...
The guy behind the reconstruction was not depicted skin color as he stated himself and he clearly states he wasn't reconstructing a Sub Saharan African since he clearly states it was still an archaic type that could have turned either and I quote: "Caucasian, N 3 g rQ, or Asian". So yes it is Afrocentrics who have taken his work and twisted it to fit your Afrocentric views. As it stands scientists have found genetically as well as cranofacial Early Europeans showed the LEAST similarities with Sub Saharan Africans and closest similarities to North Europeans.

"I was able to get just under 20 measurements on Cro Magnon of the two dozen data set I have used to compare populations in the world and the statistics showed convincingly that while Cro Magnon does not tie in with the recent French, IT DOES INDEED TIE CLOSELY WITH OUR ENGLISH AND SCANDINAVIAN SAMPLES. What we have been able to show is that the Upper Paleolithic and subsequent Mesolithic of northwest Europe simply developed there in situ out of Neanderthal precursors. We published some of this in Human Evolution 19(1):19-38 (2005) and in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 103(1):242-247 (2006). " ~ C. L. Brace 2005
trollslayer

Crown Point, IN

#24859 Jul 3, 2014
First Out of Africa - The totally isolated Tribe of the Andaman

this film reveals how modern DNA analysis suggests that these ancient people have close links to Africa, from where they have been separated for 100,000 years

http://www.google.com/url ...
7: 00 onward "they (THE Andamese... fit with AFRICANS")

-----

sigh......case closed

Level 2

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#24860 Jul 3, 2014
trollslayer wrote:
<quoted text>
maybe you missed this vid:
First Out of Africa - The totally isolated Tribe of the Andaman
this film reveals how modern DNA analysis suggests that these ancient people have close links to Africa, from where they have been separated for 100,000 years
http://www.google.com/url...
-----
sigh......case closed
Andaman Islanders do not cluster close to Africans genetically. In fact they and another Oceanic people show the longest genetic distance from Africans.

Read:
"A PCA using all samples clearly separates Africans from the rest of the world along both axes (figure available on request)." ~ The Andaman Islanders in a Regional Genetic

Look at the following charts below. None-Africans cluster closer together while Africans separate in their own group:
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/files/...
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/files/...
trollslayer

Crown Point, IN

#24861 Jul 3, 2014
I keep hearing this discussion about Neandertals ( near men) as though they are some basis or "common denominator" for man. They are not.
Africa is the "common denominator" for man.
trollslayer

Crown Point, IN

#24862 Jul 3, 2014
Eric456 wrote:
<quoted text>
Andaman Islanders do not cluster close to Africans genetically. In fact they and another Oceanic people show the longest genetic distance from Africans.
Read:
"A PCA using all samples clearly separates Africans from the rest of the world along both axes (figure available on request)." ~ The Andaman Islanders in a Regional Genetic
Look at the following charts below. None-Africans cluster closer together while Africans separate in their own group:
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/files/...
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/files/...
"Eric456"...we are going with both what we see as descendants of Africans and what the vid tells us. View the vid. I gave you a starting point7:00
http://www.google.com/url...
trollslayer

Crown Point, IN

#24863 Jul 3, 2014
trollslayer wrote:
First Out of Africa - The totally isolated Tribe of the Andaman
this film reveals how modern DNA analysis suggests that these ancient people have close links to Africa, from where they have been separated for 100,000 years
http://www.google.com/url ...
7: 00 onward "they (THE Andamese... fit with AFRICANS")
-----
sigh......case closed
this film reveals how modern DNA analysis suggests that these ancient people have close links to Africa

this film reveals how modern DNA analysis suggests that these ancient people have close links to Africa,

this film reveals how modern DNA analysis suggests that these ancient people have close links to Africa,

how modern DNA analysis suggests that these ancient people have close links to Africa,

DNA analysis shows these ancient people have close links to Africa,

DNA analysis shows these ancient people have close links to Africa,

DNA analysis shows these ancient people have close links to Africa,

DNA analysis shows these ancient people have close links to Africa,

___

Not to mention they have RETAINED THEIR AFRICAN PHENOTYPE.

Africans originally populated the world.

CASE CLOSED
African AE

Durban, South Africa

#24864 Jul 3, 2014
asho wrote:
<quoted text>
"Afrocentrists" are not behind this reconstruction of 40,000 year old skull found in europe.
https://m.youtube.com/watch...
LOL that is a NEANDERTHAL MIX done BEFORE scientists found out the NEANDERTHAL WAS WHITE! The sculpture came from a jawbone! YOUR VIDEO IS OUT OF DATE!
African AE

Durban, South Africa

#24865 Jul 3, 2014
Eric456 wrote:
<quoted text>
Andaman Islanders do not cluster close to Africans genetically. In fact they and another Oceanic people show the longest genetic distance from Africans.
Read:
"A PCA using all samples clearly separates Africans from the rest of the world along both axes (figure available on request)." ~ The Andaman Islanders in a Regional Genetic
Look at the following charts below. None-Africans cluster closer together while Africans separate in their own group:
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/files/...
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/files/...
ABSOLUTELY, NO Asians are related to Africans! These dimwitted dummies just CANT handle the truth!
asho

Eskilstuna, Sweden

#24866 Jul 3, 2014
Eric456 wrote:
<quoted text>
The guy behind the reconstruction was not depicted skin color as he stated himself and he clearly states he wasn't reconstructing a Sub Saharan African since he clearly states it was still an archaic type that could have turned either and I quote: "Caucasian, N 3 g rQ, or Asian". So yes it is Afrocentrics who have taken his work and twisted it to fit your Afrocentric views. As it stands scientists have found genetically as well as cranofacial Early Europeans showed the LEAST similarities with Sub Saharan Africans and closest similarities to North Europeans.
"I was able to get just under 20 measurements on Cro Magnon of the two dozen data set I have used to compare populations in the world and the statistics showed convincingly that while Cro Magnon does not tie in with the recent French, IT DOES INDEED TIE CLOSELY WITH OUR ENGLISH AND SCANDINAVIAN SAMPLES. What we have been able to show is that the Upper Paleolithic and subsequent Mesolithic of northwest Europe simply developed there in situ out of Neanderthal precursors. We published some of this in Human Evolution 19(1):19-38 (2005) and in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 103(1):242-247 (2006). " ~ C. L. Brace 2005
I thought all europeans of 40k were supposed to look like northern europeans after the neanderthal admixture and sh!t?^_^ What is the likelyhood that the person was white skinned? Isnt white skin like 6k years old? That guy's lot were the next batch of africans entering europe after cro magnon or another "version" of cro magnon.
African AE

Durban, South Africa

#24867 Jul 3, 2014
BMT wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe the Andamanese took MtDna M out of Africa to India and beyond. M evolved in Africa.
" Given the insularity of the Andamanese, this has led geneticists to believe that this haplogroup originated with the earliest settlers of India during the coastal migration that brought the ancestors of the Andamanese to the Indian mainland, the Andaman Islands and further afield to Southeast Asia.[20"
Logical
ANDAMANESE inherited Haplogroup M in Asia! Andamamese ARE CLOSELY RELATED TO OTHER ASIANS NOT AFRICANS! Haplogroup M originated from Haplogroup L3 which came out of African and when in Asia mutated into M!
Andamanese are closely related to OTHER ASIANS! Haplogroup M is found in 70% of Indians!
trollslayer

Crown Point, IN

#24868 Jul 3, 2014
trollslayer wrote:
First Out of Africa - The totally isolated Tribe of the Andaman
this film reveals how modern DNA analysis suggests that these ancient people have close links to Africa, from where they have been separated for 100,000 years
http://www.google.com/url ...
7: 00 onward "they (THE Andamese... fit with AFRICANS")
-----
sigh......case closed
trollslayer wrote:
<quoted text>
this film reveals how modern DNA analysis suggests that these ancient people have close links to Africa
this film reveals how modern DNA analysis suggests that these ancient people have close links to Africa,
this film reveals how modern DNA analysis suggests that these ancient people have close links to Africa,
how modern DNA analysis suggests that these ancient people have close links to Africa,
DNA analysis shows these ancient people have close links to Africa,
DNA analysis shows these ancient people have close links to Africa,
DNA analysis shows these ancient people have close links to Africa,
DNA analysis shows these ancient people have close links to Africa,
___
Not to mention they have RETAINED THEIR AFRICAN PHENOTYPE.
Africans originally populated the world.
CASE CLOSED
asho

Eskilstuna, Sweden

#24869 Jul 3, 2014
Eric456 wrote:
<quoted text>
The guy behind the reconstruction was not depicted skin color as he stated himself and he clearly states he wasn't reconstructing a Sub Saharan African since he clearly states it was still an archaic type that could have turned either and I quote: "Caucasian, N 3 g rQ, or Asian". So yes it is Afrocentrics who have taken his work and twisted it to fit your Afrocentric views. As it stands scientists have found genetically as well as cranofacial Early Europeans showed the LEAST similarities with Sub Saharan Africans and closest similarities to North Europeans.
"I was able to get just under 20 measurements on Cro Magnon of the two dozen data set I have used to compare populations in the world and the statistics showed convincingly that while Cro Magnon does not tie in with the recent French, IT DOES INDEED TIE CLOSELY WITH OUR ENGLISH AND SCANDINAVIAN SAMPLES. What we have been able to show is that the Upper Paleolithic and subsequent Mesolithic of northwest Europe simply developed there in situ out of Neanderthal precursors. We published some of this in Human Evolution 19(1):19-38 (2005) and in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 103(1):242-247 (2006). " ~ C. L. Brace 2005
Yet archaic Cro magnon were european race? Archaic European, archaic Sub Saharan or archaic Asia are still member of their respective races. Don't you love associating archaic cro magnon with northern europeans. "First European" was then archaic African as you can see the resemblance to Sub Saharan Africans clearly and that is why he labelled "First European" as in african who just made his way into europe from Africa.
Gmoney AKA Big G

Petersburg, VA

#24870 Jul 3, 2014
Eric456 wrote:
<quoted text>
They were not 'Africans', they were already evolving into None Africans=Eurasians and seperated from Africans before they even spread out across Eurasia. In fact genetic studies show that ALL Eurasians are more closely related to each other and equally removed from Africans, while Africans clearly separate from ALL NONE AFRICANS and make cluster groups of their own.
Read:
"A PCA using all samples clearly separates Africans from the rest of the world along both axes (figure available on request)." ~ The Andaman Islanders in a Regional Genetic
Read:
"The most prominent feature of the genetic distances in this study is the SPLIT between sub-Saharan African and non-African populations" ~ Genetic Variation Among World Populations: Inferences From 100 Alu Insertion Polymorphisms
Read:
"The comparison of haplotype variation among populations supports a single out-of-Africa migration event and suggests that the founding population of Eurasia may have been relatively large BUT ISOLATED FROM AFRICANS Africans for a period of time. Note that PC 1 accounts for nearly eight times as much variation as PC 2. This speaks to the African vs. non-African gap."
Pay Attention to what Is posted above and below:
"A more likely explanation for the OoA bottleneck is that Eurasia was populated by a larger population that had been relatively isolated from other modern human populations for tens of thousands of years prior to the expansion. The first fossil evidence for modern humans outside of Africa is in the Middle East at Skhul and Qafzeh between 80,000-100,000 years ago, which is at least 20,000 years prior to the Eurasian diaspora. If a population of modern humans remained in the Middle East until the expansion into Eurasia, there would have been sufficient time for genetic drift to reduce heterozygosity dramatically before the Eurasia expansion. This “Middle East isolation” hypothesis provides a robust explanation for the relative homogeneity of European and Asian populations relative to African populations (see Figures 3A-B) and is supported by a recent maximum likelihood estimate of 140,000 years ago for the time of EURASIAN-WEST AFRICAN populations separation. Interestingly, a recent study of the Neandertal genome suggests that the non-African individuals, but not the Africans, contain similar amount of admixture (1-4%) with the Neandertals . The authors suggest that the admixture must have happened between the Neandertals with an ancestral non-African population before the Eurasian expansion. Given the fossil, archaeological, and genetic evidence, the Middle East isolation hypothesis warrants rigorous evaluation as whole-genome sequence data become available." ~ Toward a more uniform sampling of human genetic diversity: a survey of worldwide populations by high-density genotyping.,
Definitely Africans
African AE

Durban, South Africa

#24871 Jul 3, 2014
asho wrote:
<quoted text>
I thought all europeans of 40k were supposed to look like northern europeans after the neanderthal admixture and sh!t?^_^ What is the likelyhood that the person was white skinned? Isnt white skin like 6k years old? That guy's lot were the next batch of africans entering europe after cro magnon or another "version" of cro magnon.
NOPE NOPE NOPE he is supposedly a NEANDERTHAL MIX! Like I said before that sculpture was done BEFORE it was found that the NEANDERTHAL WAS A WHITE MAN!
CROMAGNON WAS A WHITE CAUCASIAN and NOT black at all. There are NO Cromagnon skeletons in Africa (except North Africa but he came from the Middle East 40 000 years ago)
READ EXTRA SLOWLY AND GET A CLUE:
www.politicalblindspot.com/scientists-reveal-...

THE FIRST EUROPEAN WAS THE WHITE HAIRY NEANDERTHAL and his offsping THE WHITE CAUCASIAN CROMAGNON looking EXACTLY like modern EUROPEANS at least 40 000 years ago!
Gmoney AKA Big G

Petersburg, VA

#24872 Jul 3, 2014
asho wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet archaic Cro magnon were european race? Archaic European, archaic Sub Saharan or archaic Asia are still member of their respective races. Don't you love associating archaic cro magnon with northern europeans. "First European" was then archaic African as you can see the resemblance to Sub Saharan Africans clearly and that is why he labelled "First European" as in african who just made his way into europe from Africa.
They are dumb ignorant racist bigot who are blinded by prejudices. They cannot see the truth or will they ever. Not even if it is right in their face.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

African-American Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 4 min John Galt 1,417,189
Why do blacks claim North Africans as black? 14 min Moses 32
Are black people really the real jews? (Oct '12) 30 min Moses 885
Black men are the ORIGINAL cuckolds! (Oct '15) 31 min king cuckold 22
If the real Jews are Black (Dec '14) 35 min Moses 342
K Michelle says black men ain't sh***t 53 min BLACK COPS R DL 5
Django Actress Negro Bed-wench Charged for Pros... (Oct '14) 1 hr BLACK COPS R DL 27
Obama finally decides to put golfing aside to v... 1 hr KIP 23
Trump will carry atleast 25% of the BLACK VOTE 1 hr fluer 219
Why aren't there any Negroes in the Bible? 2 hr Moses 352
FREE RIDDIMS DOWNLOADS (Riddims from the year 1... (Jan '13) 6 hr DJ MATTHEW 58
News Trump Time Capsule #81: 'What the Hell Do You H... 6 hr Far Away 53
More from around the web