|
Post by olehint on Oct 29, 2010 2:40:42 GMT -5
If somebody made a statement about the black race, they could replace the words "black race" with "Biologically African" and make the same statement and mean the same thing
|
|
|
Post by zoobalac on Nov 21, 2010 5:30:04 GMT -5
^These are the most ridiculous rebuttals I've ever seen. Tyro is of the contention that since Egyptians by and large carry African Y-chromosomes, of the variety associated with e1b1b, e1b1b2, and e1b1a (in descending frequency), and since some Egyptians have relatively lighter skin than other Africans, it concludes that those markers can be associated with light skin and thus, the Egyptians have always been light skinned. This ignores so much (including the fact that ultra dark skinned populations carry these same lineages). How about some context here. Berbers, even the hyper-light skinned northwesterners carry predominant Y-chromosome lineages yet we are aware that there has been much maternally mediated gene flow and that their light skin is due to the European-derived SLC24A5 mutation. “Genetic Evidence for the Convergent Evolution of Light Skin in Europeans and East Asians” Heather L. Norton,*1 Rick A. Kittles The gene is absent in the relatively more isolated "sub-Saharan" or very dark skinned African populations. The allele developed in Europe and is present in North Africa. Therefore, it concludes that said light skin color in North Africa is due to admixture with incoming hordes from Europe or through some kind of proxy. Thus, your argument falls flat. Now, two direct questions. 1) Does a super tropical body plan indicate overall "tropical" adaptation, including dark skin, as suggested by Brace (1993)? 2) Do light skinned moderns have this super tropically adapted skeletal structure and if not, what changed? If this changed, couldn't their skin color have changed a bit as well, assuming a direct correlation? But what populations in North Africa?
|
|
|
Post by truthteacher2007 on Nov 21, 2010 11:50:07 GMT -5
You would think that none of you ever saw an Aro American or Afro Latino for crying out loud! For one thing, when you say light skin, what exactly do you mean? Its a relative concept. Light in comparison to whom? Dark in comparison to whom? Most Egyptians including Lower Egyptians are considerably darker then most of the people you find in the Mediterranian countries of Europe and the Eastern Mediterranian, like Turkey, Syria and Lebanon.
Haplotypes do not neccessarily indicate skin color, dominant and recessive genes do. It doesn't take very much mixing to produce a lighter skin tone. Once again, look to the African diasporan communites. All you need is one or two light skinned ancestors to produce lighter skinned offspring in a darker skinned population. therefore, they could have an African majority genetic structure, but have light skin because the light skin genes were dominant. Now lets suppose that you get a small population that absorbed a slight influx of light skinned people. If they tend to marry within their group the genes for light skin get passed on and it becomes a dominant trait. Now lets say that at some point there is a population explosion within that group. You now have a great number of people with light skin even though the percentage of African genes are numerically higher.
Also, take into account form the reality of our own experiences, lives, communities, that light skin does not exclude other African physical traits such as hair texture, limb ratios, facial features etc. Also consider how many dark skinned Afro American males actually have European Y haplotypes. Skin color and haplotypes do not always match up. It may make sense on paper, but in real life it doesn't.
I think people spend too much time being hung up on how light or dark Egyptians are because we are still looking at the world through the lense of a Eurocentric constructed world view. All these notions of what an African should look like, racial purity etc speaks more to Eurocentric paranoia of racial contamination and the need to prove that the "real" African is fundamentally different from the European. Our societies have never been based on skin colors or notions of race, but on cultural affiliation. Therefore, wether or not an Egyptian mated with a non African was of no consequence within the context of their society and culture because it was nationality and culture wich determined their identity, not color. Therefore, just as having an Irish grand parent does not diminish a person's membership in the African Americans/Afro Latino community, so too was a person's identity not effected by absorbing Asiatics or others from time to time. In both cases, its being born into and the identification and affiliation with the group that determines their identity. This is why in any gathering of Afro Americans skin colors range from ash white to ash black. They are all different colors, but yet the same people. Same holds true with Egyptians. There are no mysteries here, they are just people very much like any other group of people in the African diaspora. Mystery solved......
|
|
|
Post by zoobalac on Nov 22, 2010 8:38:42 GMT -5
You would think that none of you ever saw an Aro American or Afro Latino for crying out loud! For one thing, when you say light skin, what exactly do you mean? Its a relative concept. Light in comparison to whom? Dark in comparison to whom? Most Egyptians including Lower Egyptians are considerably darker then most of the people you find in the Mediterranian countries of Europe and the Eastern Mediterranian, like Turkey, Syria and Lebanon. Haplotypes do not neccessarily indicate skin color, dominant and recessive genes do. It doesn't take very much mixing to produce a lighter skin tone. Once again, look to the African diasporan communites. All you need is one or two light skinned ancestors to produce lighter skinned offspring in a darker skinned population. therefore, they could have an African majority genetic structure, but have light skin because the light skin genes were dominant. Now lets suppose that you get a small population that absorbed a slight influx of light skinned people. If they tend to marry within their group the genes for light skin get passed on and it becomes a dominant trait. Now lets say that at some point there is a population explosion within that group. You now have a great number of people with light skin even though the percentage of African genes are numerically higher. Also, take into account form the reality of our own experiences, lives, communities, that light skin does not exclude other African physical traits such as hair texture, limb ratios, facial features etc. Also consider how many dark skinned Afro American males actually have European Y haplotypes. Skin color and haplotypes do not always match up. It may make sense on paper, but in real life it doesn't. I think people spend too much time being hung up on how light or dark Egyptians are because we are still looking at the world through the lense of a Eurocentric constructed world view. All these notions of what an African should look like, racial purity etc speaks more to Eurocentric paranoia of racial contamination and the need to prove that the "real" African is fundamentally different from the European. Our societies have never been based on skin colors or notions of race, but on cultural affiliation. Therefore, wether or not an Egyptian mated with a non African was of no consequence within the context of their society and culture because it was nationality and culture wich determined their identity, not color. Therefore, just as having an Irish grand parent does not diminish a person's membership in the African Americans/Afro Latino community, so too was a person's identity not effected by absorbing Asiatics or others from time to time. In both cases, its being born into and the identification and affiliation with the group that determines their identity. This is why in any gathering of Afro Americans skin colors range from ash white to ash black. They are all different colors, but yet the same people. Same holds true with Egyptians. There are no mysteries here, they are just people very much like any other group of people in the African diaspora. Mystery solved...... Good comment.
|
|