E1b1b is north african and not negroid...scientists says

[zarahan]

^^ Failure to account for and include the full range of African diversity of the Mechta peoples
in North Africa is an exercise in distorted whitewashing. Cold climate European Cro-magnons are not
"representative" of Africoid peoples. But even as far as Cro-Magnons, African diversity has that
covered too. They are variable and numerous Cro-Magnon types indeed show "negroid" features, debunking
any claims to European monopoly on what is called "Cro-Magnon."



^^As far as who is supposed to be "Cro-magnon", Africans already "been there, done that"...

[Deleted]

We have DNA from Kostenki 14, an early Upper Palaeolithic specimen from Russia.

K14 is closest in PCA (450,206 SNP's) to modern Central Asian, followed by South Asian, and European populations.

European populations are far closer to K14 than any African population:


Supplementary Materials for: Genomic structure in Europeans dating back at least 36,200 years. Science 346 (6213), 1113-8

[Deleted]

Most European Upper Palaeolithic skulls morphometrically do not closely resemble modern Europeans, despite the fact the DNA is showing close genetic affinity. This discrepancy is because morphological affinity is a poor indicator for the determination of ancestral-descendant relationships between the Upper Palaeolithic and Holocene because there were significant craniofacial changes during this time-period. These were not only confined to Europe, but across the globe (although they were less pronounced in other areas).

"We examined a sample of 35 European Upper Palaeolithic crania (EUP) using multivariate statistical methods and found 19 of these specimens display a closer affinity to a sample of non-European recent skulls (out of seven samples from all over the world, including Europe, ten were closest to the Australian sample, three to Mokapu (Hawaii), two to San, two to Zulu, and two to the sample from Japan)." (Van Vark et al. 2005)

[Deleted]

Anyway, I tried to explain this at Anthroscape but was banned.

Cro-Magnon were not "Caucasoid"
s1.zetaboards.com/anthroscape/topic/5955645/1/

However, I should point out Afrocentrists are also distorting the data. Cannot be bothered to get into that now, but most of how Zaharan phrases things is inaccurate.

[anansi]

Slam-dunked^^.lol

[Deleted]

There is no genetic discontinuity between Upper Palaeolithic Europeans (EUP) and modern Europeans. The latter are far closer genetically to EUP than any modern African, East Asian etc. (see the PCA for K14 above)

The discontinuity is morphological. EUP's were not morphometrically "Caucasoid", but rather "Australoid" (hence Van Vark et al. 2005 found the EUP crania specimens which display a closer affinity to a sample of non-European recent skulls, mostly do so with Australian aborigines).

That EUP's looked "Australoid" has long been known: the old physical anthropological literature (e.g. Cole, 1965) calls Australoids: "Archaic Whites".

docslide.us/documents/cole-sonia-the-races-of-man.html

"There are also survivors of an ancient ‘archaic White’ or Palaeo-Asiatic stock which was probably widespread before the Caucasoids and the Mongoloids became differentiated. Survivors of this stock are grouped in the Australoid division of mankind, which includes the Australian aborigines." p. 9

"The Australoid stock is sometimes described as ‘archaic White’...A generalized ‘archaic White’ was, so far as we know, the earliest form of Homo sapiens; many characteristics of the present Australoids are found in fossil human remains dating from the Upper Pleistocene." p. 81

[Deleted]

"Another way to make the point is with the mean distances between the seventeen Caucasian-area fossils (Cro-Magnon to Taforalt) and five target populations: Norse, 0. 914; Zulu, 0.937; Tolai, 0.88; Anyang, 0.91, Santa Cruz, 0. 882." (Sarich, 1997)

EUP in this study show closest morphometric affinity to modern Tolai people (0.88), who are from Papua New Guinea and look "Australoid".

Note these though studies do not support what Zaharan is saying. EUP skulls are not showing close African affinity. EUP are closer to modern Europeans than modern Africans.

[thamm1]

The native people from Australia looks like black people.

[Deleted]

Mar 5, 2016 4:43:00 GMT -5 thamm1 said:

The native people from Australia looks like black people.

From a quick glance, yes. But when measurements of the skull are taken - Australo-Melanesians are distinct to native Africans. The measurement, GLS, glabella projection, for example shows marked (mean) differences to the extent this feature alone can reliably distinguish African from Tasmanian/Melanesian/Australian crania:

"one character (no. 37, glabella projection) showed a strong bimodality with respect to the African and Melanesian units - such that it alone would sort the Africans from the Melanesians with a better than 90% accuracy" (Sarich, 1997)

[thamm1]

I don't know about no quick glance. They are black just like black Africans except they live in Australia. Who cares about skull size.

[thamm1]

So now you're trying to say there was black Australian people in North Africa?

[Deleted]

No.

The reason the Taforalt skulls from North Africa look "Australoid" (like Upper Paleolithic Europeans) is because Australian aborigines are the least specialized and have retained the most Plesiomorphic (i.e. ancestral derived) traits, so they resemble the closest to how Late Pleistocene anatomically modern humans looked.

[Deleted]

Btw, Sarich (1997) which puts Taforalt closest to modern Tolai people is another blow to Zaharan. Upper Paleolithic North Africans are closer to Australo-Melanesians, morphometrically, than modern African populations. These remains should not be called "Africoid"/"Negroid".

[thamm1]

I have never seen any white north Africanot people look like indigenous Australian people but I have seen plenty black Africans favor indigenous Australian people. So White north africans are descendants of black Australo-Melanesians? You are crazy. It doesn't matter if they are black African or black Melanesian they all look the same and they are all black. White north Africans don't come from black people.

[thamm1]

Bantu and yoruba etc peoples have nothing to do with Egypt. North Africans aka the Mediterranean race is brown not black. Haplogroup E1b1b1a or E1b1b1b which were the "Moors". The Moors were a collection of Haplogroup E peoples ranging from Morocco to Egypt. The lustreware pottery of Al Andlus is from Egypt and the Mudejar Architecture is Derived from Morocco and Islamic Egypt. There is NO examples of this architecture in subsaharran African. We are all "Africans" however that word is of Roman origin and used to describe a north African tribe the Afri who were not negroid but Berber in apperance. The ancient egyptians were light brown to a dark tawny color. Nubians were depicted as a seperate race as were other groups. Many Pharrohs were of Lybian stock. Nigerians and Congonese peoples want to make baseless claims to the Moors and Egyptians is rather odd. What on earth is wrong with being the descedants of west Africans?