jethro
Scribe
Site guidelines violation- off-topic spamming across multiple threads w/o even addressing issues.
Posts: 158 
|
Post by jethro on Sept 14, 2016 1:25:10 GMT -5
Bogus claim #3: NATUFIANS WERE INDIGENOUS NORTH AFRICAN CAUCASIANS carrying E-Z830 and MTDNA N
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natufian_culture
ALL NORTH AFRICANS carry NEANDERTHAL DNA going back to the first modern man in NORTH AFRICA, the very UPPER PALEOLITHIC EUROPEAN, CRO-MAGNON!
The Basal Eurasians in the MID EAST originated from the FIRST MODERN HUMANS TO LEAVE AFRICA VIA SAUDI ARABIA! Modern INDIGENOUS Arabs carry their ancient DNA! THERE WERE NO NEANDERTHALS IN SAUDI ARABIA! Eventually these peoples left SAUDI ARABIA and went into the MIDDLE EAST and formed an isolated group in the MID EAST NOT ENCOUNTERING ANY NEANDERTHALS!
 lol speaking of garbage, your post is a good example of it. LOL at the Wikipedia "references" recently "doctored" to provide "supporting" information, as if anyone is being fooled. Nor is anyone fooled by the "new" account. XYZ already has the key info posted so only a few comments.. 1) No one claims that =Natufians were all 100% African, all the time. How could they be forever in the diverse crossroads area of the Middle East? And how could they remained unchanged and unvarying for all time, over thousands of years since African migrants went out into the Levant? SO the strawman of the unchanging "100% African" Natufians fails right off the bat. We all know the Natufians were diverse. The key point is their clear African component, linked with movement from Africa. That component may have various implications for the social construct known as "race"- or "one-drop" race hierarchies, but the hard data as to that African component is a fact. 2) Before certain information mysteriously "disappeared" or was watered down and obscured on the Wiki article by assorted moles, documentation in place showed the Natufians had a clear African component. Said moles removing or watering down the data may think they are successful in "whiting out" the info, but that laughable tactic fails miserably as well. The data is not going any place. The strong placement of the data in Google search results, whether from Reloaded or as mirrored on ES and other blogs means all the bogus "stealth edits" and "page guarding" is a gigantic waste of time. They have already failed. 3) The laughable Natufian "wandering Caucasoids" claim fails completely as shown above by the recent DNA study, as well as by skeletal studies by people like Brace et al.  To this is added the new genetic data by Lizardis et al: "Our finding that at least Natufians had Y-chromosomes of African origin (Supplementary Information, section 6) suggested to us initially that gene flow from Africa (which did not experience Neanderthal admixture) may have contributed Basal Eurasian ancestry into the ancient Near East.. The presence of Basal Eurasian ancestry not only in the Epipaleolithic Natufians from the Levant, but also of the Upper Paleolithic/Mesolithic of Georgia8 suggest that while this type of ancestry first appears in Europe with the Early Neolithic7, it was already pervasive in the Near East before the advent of the Neolithic. Future studies of human remains from the Near East may determine (i) how much earlier the Basal Eurasians were present there, (ii) whether they represent a population of African origin or one that lived in Eurasia but did not experience the Neanderthal admixture of other Eurasians.." -- Lizardis et al 2016. The genetic structure of the world’s first farmers. bioRXIV 4) "Basal EUrasians" show a distinctive African strand, as demonstrated by both cranial and DNA data. Attempts to "white out" the African component fail even before they start   5) As regards would be "Caucasian" Cro-Magnons- supposed "originals" of North Africa. that too fails..  Thus the claim: NATUFIANS WERE INDIGENOUS NORTH AFRICAN CAUCASIANS .!^^Still stands debunked..   |
|
jethro
Scribe
Site guidelines violation- off-topic spamming across multiple threads w/o even addressing issues.
Posts: 158
|
Post by jethro on Sept 14, 2016 1:30:19 GMT -5
|
|
jethro
Scribe
Site guidelines violation- off-topic spamming across multiple threads w/o even addressing issues.
Posts: 158
|
Post by jethro on Sept 14, 2016 1:37:47 GMT -5
Bogus claim #3: NATUFIANS WERE INDIGENOUS NORTH AFRICAN CAUCASIANS carrying E-Z830 and MTDNA N
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natufian_culture
ALL NORTH AFRICANS carry NEANDERTHAL DNA going back to the first modern man in NORTH AFRICA, the very UPPER PALEOLITHIC EUROPEAN, CRO-MAGNON!
The Basal Eurasians in the MID EAST originated from the FIRST MODERN HUMANS TO LEAVE AFRICA VIA SAUDI ARABIA! Modern INDIGENOUS Arabs carry their ancient DNA! THERE WERE NO NEANDERTHALS IN SAUDI ARABIA! Eventually these peoples left SAUDI ARABIA and went into the MIDDLE EAST and formed an isolated group in the MID EAST NOT ENCOUNTERING ANY NEANDERTHALS!
lol speaking of garbage, your post is a good example of it. LOL at the Wikipedia "references" recently "doctored" to provide "supporting" information, as if anyone is being fooled. Nor is anyone fooled by the "new" account. XYZ already has the key info posted so only a few comments.. 1) No one claims that =Natufians were all 100% African, all the time. How could they be forever in the diverse crossroads area of the Middle East? And how could they remained unchanged and unvarying for all time, over thousands of years since African migrants went out into the Levant? SO the strawman of the unchanging "100% African" Natufians fails right off the bat. We all know the Natufians were diverse. The key point is their clear African component, linked with movement from Africa. That component may have various implications for the social construct known as "race"- or "one-drop" race hierarchies, but the hard data as to that African component is a fact. 2) Before certain information mysteriously "disappeared" or was watered down and obscured on the Wiki article by assorted moles, documentation in place showed the Natufians had a clear African component. Said moles removing or watering down the data may think they are successful in "whiting out" the info, but that laughable tactic fails miserably as well. The data is not going any place. The strong placement of the data in Google search results, whether from Reloaded or as mirrored on ES and other blogs means all the bogus "stealth edits" and "page guarding" is a gigantic waste of time. They have already failed. 3) The laughable Natufian "wandering Caucasoids" claim fails completely as shown above by the recent DNA study, as well as by skeletal studies by people like Brace et al. To this is added the new genetic data by Lizardis et al: "Our finding that at least Natufians had Y-chromosomes of African origin (Supplementary Information, section 6) suggested to us initially that gene flow from Africa (which did not experience Neanderthal admixture) may have contributed Basal Eurasian ancestry into the ancient Near East.. The presence of Basal Eurasian ancestry not only in the Epipaleolithic Natufians from the Levant, but also of the Upper Paleolithic/Mesolithic of Georgia8 suggest that while this type of ancestry first appears in Europe with the Early Neolithic7, it was already pervasive in the Near East before the advent of the Neolithic. Future studies of human remains from the Near East may determine (i) how much earlier the Basal Eurasians were present there, (ii) whether they represent a population of African origin or one that lived in Eurasia but did not experience the Neanderthal admixture of other Eurasians.." -- Lizardis et al 2016. The genetic structure of the world’s first farmers. bioRXIV 4) "Basal EUrasians" show a distinctive African strand, as demonstrated by both cranial and DNA data. Attempts to "white out" the African component fail even before they start 5) As regards would be "Caucasian" Cro-Magnons- supposed "originals" of North Africa. that too fails.. Thus the claim: NATUFIANS WERE INDIGENOUS NORTH AFRICAN CAUCASIANS .!^^Still stands debunked.. |
|
jethro
Scribe
Site guidelines violation- off-topic spamming across multiple threads w/o even addressing issues.
Posts: 158
|
Post by jethro on Sept 14, 2016 1:41:26 GMT -5
I ONLY BELIEVE GENUINE SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH SITES AND WIKI!
WIKI STATES THE NATUFIANS CARRIED E-Z830 and the VERY EURASIAN MTDNA N
E-Z830 ORIGINATED IN NORTH AFRICA AMONGST THE VERY INDIGENOUS NORTH AFRICAN CAUCASIANS!
EINSTEIN CARRIED E-Z830 as HIS MAIN Y-DNA! Does he resemble a SSA??? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
|
|
jethro
Scribe
Site guidelines violation- off-topic spamming across multiple threads w/o even addressing issues.
Posts: 158
|
Post by jethro on Sept 14, 2016 1:57:05 GMT -5
ANY BLACK AFRICANS CARRYING E-Z830 would have got it from a back migration of NORTH AFRICANS!
FIRST MODERN MAN ABSOLUTELY EVERYWHERE WAS THE CAUCASIAN CRO-MAGNON and his skull is found throughout the world including in SOUTH AFRICA AND EGYPT!
37 000 year old NAZLET KHATER MAN OF EGYPT WAS A CAUCASIAN UPPER PALEOLITHIC EUROPEAN as was 36 000 year old South African HOFMEYR MAN!
|
|
jethro
Scribe
Site guidelines violation- off-topic spamming across multiple threads w/o even addressing issues.
Posts: 158
|
Post by jethro on Sept 14, 2016 5:56:53 GMT -5
|
|
jethro
Scribe
Site guidelines violation- off-topic spamming across multiple threads w/o even addressing issues.
Posts: 158
|
Post by jethro on Sept 14, 2016 6:05:29 GMT -5
LOL SO WIKI IS DOCTORED! SO TYPICAL OF DUMBAZZ AFRONAZIS that cant face reality! Facts are, YOUR LINKS ARE OUT OF DATE and the other LINKS ARE NOT GENUINE SCIENTIFIC RESPECTED LINKS! THERE WERE NEVER EVER ANY BLACK AFRICANS IN EURASIAN EVER!!! N*GR***DS ARE ONLY 8000 years old: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asselar_manCAUCASIANS are 45 000 years old: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AurignacianFIRST EUROPEANS WERE HEAVILY MIXED WITH NEANDERTHALS and looked FCK ALL like N*GR***DS that didnt even exist at the time! |
|
|
|
Post by anansi on Sept 14, 2016 9:58:17 GMT -5
Dear Jethro, you claimed early man as Caucasoid or Caucasian but, that implies travels from the Caucasus back migration into Africa... you can't back that up can now can you? nominclosure or names have meaning...so what in hell do early man have to do with the Caucasus, a string of Mts centered around Armenia and Turkey, White Skin in Europeans Only Took Off 6,000 Years Ago paleodiabetic.com/2015/04/08/white-skin-in-European which only-took-off-6000-years-ago/You are too recent , Kmt and other African civs already took off by then before you , a modern White or ple skinned person, assuming you are white before transforming, whatever early phenotype developed in humid tropical Africa, rest assured they were black skinned and mostly broad featured, simply because man was born in the tropics before travelling elsewhere , they carried that look, which is geographically and climatically dependent, there were no Caucasoid because that implied non African, Europeans and Asians and all others are simply a subset set of Africans..deal with it!!! |
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Sept 14, 2016 10:37:26 GMT -5
I am still not clear on what he is arguing about. Is he saying E-M35 has an European origin? He can’t be serious! The Natufians are essentially E-M35 so I assume he is suggesting that Natufians came from Europe(insert Sarcasm). I guessed he missed Lazaridis claim that Natufians have a African origin. Did E-M35 “back-migrated” into Africa from Europe?
Granted E-M2 is relatively young. But E-M2 has an East African origin just as E-M35. He also missed the fact that paraclades of E-M35 are found deep within southern Africa(San/Sandawe). Significance? Africans diverging from a central source ie the Great Lakes to the North , North West , across the Red Sea and deep to the South in Africa.
I assume also he will focus on producing data instead of foul language and name calling. Egyptsearch is better suited for that. On ESR here we can have a civil discussion and produce data to back it up.
He isn’t well-read because he will know that indeed modern Europeans are a subset of Africans. As RECENT data has shown down to the depigment skin came from Africans migrating into Europe about 6000BC.
And my man. We are going to have a discussion where we go in circles. I have produced data showing supposed and falsely identified “Neanderthal ancestry” is found deep within Southern Africa debunking your naïve claim, which has long been corrected, of SSA having no such ancestry. Once you have understand and accept that fact we can go on to the next lesson or topic. I debate my equals , all others I teach.
@ Brada. I assume his language will be cleaned up with a warning. We are open to civil discussion at this site.
|
|
jethro
Scribe
Site guidelines violation- off-topic spamming across multiple threads w/o even addressing issues.
Posts: 158
|
Post by jethro on Sept 15, 2016 1:22:06 GMT -5
Dear Jethro, you claimed early man as Caucasoid or Caucasian but, that implies travels from the Caucasus back migration into Africa... you can't back that up can now can you? nominclosure or names have meaning...so what in hell do early man have to do with the Caucasus, a string of Mts centered around Armenia and Turkey, White Skin in Europeans Only Took Off 6,000 Years Ago paleodiabetic.com/2015/04/08/white-skin-in-European which only-took-off-6000-years-ago/You are too recent , Kmt and other African civs already took off by then before you , a modern White or ple skinned person, assuming you are white before transforming, whatever early phenotype developed in humid tropical Africa, rest assured they were black skinned and mostly broad featured, simply because man was born in the tropics before travelling elsewhere , they carried that look, which is geographically and climatically dependent, there were no Caucasoid because that implied non African, Europeans and Asians and all others are simply a subset set of Africans..deal with it!!! CAUCASIANS ORIGINATED IN THE MIDDLE EAST before moving throughout the ENTIRE WORLD! THE FIRST ORIGINAL MODERN HUMANS IN EUROPE, MIDDLE EAST and EGYPT, NORTH AFRICA WERE CAUCASIANS WITH BROWN SKIN, BLUE EYES AND STRAIGHT HAIR! 8000 year old ORIGINAL EUROPEAN: s1.ibtimes.com/sites/www.ibtimes.com/files/styles/embed/public/2014/01/27/la-brana.jpgWHITE SKIN ORIGINATED IN CENTRAL ASIA about 9000 years ago and was taken into EUROPE BY THE VERY WHITE MIDDLE EASTERN FARMERS READ SUPER SLOWLY: www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/04/how-europeans-evolved-white-skin EUROPEANS, MIDDLE EASTERNERS, EGYPTIANS AND NORTH AFRICANS at one time ALL LOOKED JUST LIKE LABRANA MAN: |
|
jethro
Scribe
Site guidelines violation- off-topic spamming across multiple threads w/o even addressing issues.
Posts: 158
|
Post by jethro on Sept 15, 2016 1:30:53 GMT -5
I am still not clear on what he is arguing about. Is he saying E-M35 has an European origin? He can’t be serious! The Natufians are essentially E-M35 so I assume he is suggesting that Natufians came from Europe(insert Sarcasm). I guessed he missed Lazaridis claim that Natufians have a African origin. Did E-M35 “back-migrated” into Africa from Europe? Granted E-M2 is relatively young. But E-M2 has an East African origin just as E-M35. He also missed the fact that paraclades of E-M35 are found deep within southern Africa(San/Sandawe). Significance? Africans diverging from a central source ie the Great Lakes to the North , North West , across the Red Sea and deep to the South in Africa. I assume also he will focus on producing data instead of foul language and name calling. Egyptsearch is better suited for that. On ESR here we can have a civil discussion and produce data to back it up. He isn’t well-read because he will know that indeed modern Europeans are a subset of Africans. As RECENT data has shown down to the depigment skin came from Africans migrating into Europe about 6000BC. And my man. We are going to have a discussion where we go in circles. I have produced data showing supposed and falsely identified “Neanderthal ancestry” is found deep within Southern Africa debunking your naïve claim, which has long been corrected, of SSA having no such ancestry. Once you have understand and accept that fact we can go on to the next lesson or topic. I debate my equals , all others I teach. @ Brada. I assume his language will be cleaned up with a warning. We are open to civil discussion at this site. HAPLOGROUP DE is EURASIAN in ORIGIN and so is Y-DNA E 2016 dienekes.blogspot.co.za/2016/04/bursts-in-human-male-demography.htmlI would have used the genuine Scientific site NATURE, but I have to pay for it, so Dienekes will have to do! EUROPEANS ARE NOT A SUBSET OF AFRICANS! ALL MODERN HUMANS ORIGINATED FROM THE FIRST MODERN MAN, THE CAUCASIAN CRO-MAGNON and carry his DNA! WHERE RACES ORIGINATED: 2.bp.blogspot.com/-wKbFjO2sI-I/U-I-sKa9qQI/AAAAAAAAB8s/yg2S8Q8oIq4/s1600/racial-origins.jpgFIRST MODERN MAN ABSOLUTELY EVERYWHERE and his CAUCASIAN skull is found in ancient Egypt dated 37 000 years (Nazlet Khater)and South Africa dated 36 000 years (Hofmeyr) |
|
jethro
Scribe
Site guidelines violation- off-topic spamming across multiple threads w/o even addressing issues.
Posts: 158
|
Post by jethro on Sept 15, 2016 1:42:50 GMT -5
Dear Jethro, you claimed early man as Caucasoid or Caucasian but, that implies travels from the Caucasus back migration into Africa... you can't back that up can now can you? nominclosure or names have meaning...so what in hell do early man have to do with the Caucasus, a string of Mts centered around Armenia and Turkey, White Skin in Europeans Only Took Off 6,000 Years Ago paleodiabetic.com/2015/04/08/white-skin-in-European which only-took-off-6000-years-ago/You are too recent , Kmt and other African civs already took off by then before you , a modern White or ple skinned person, assuming you are white before transforming, whatever early phenotype developed in humid tropical Africa, rest assured they were black skinned and mostly broad featured, simply because man was born in the tropics before travelling elsewhere , they carried that look, which is geographically and climatically dependent, there were no Caucasoid because that implied non African, Europeans and Asians and all others are simply a subset set of Africans..deal with it!!! ANCIENT 24 000 year old MAL'TA BOY of SIBERIA was RELATED TO BOTH NATIVE AMERICANS AND EUROPEANS! MODERN NATIVE AMERICANS carry 1/3 ANCIENT EUROPEAN DNA! en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mal%27ta-Buret%27_cultureLIKE I SAID BEFORE< ALL MODERN HUMANS ORIGINATED FROM THE CAUCASIAN CRO-MAGNON |
|
jethro
Scribe
Site guidelines violation- off-topic spamming across multiple threads w/o even addressing issues.
Posts: 158
|
Post by jethro on Sept 15, 2016 1:46:55 GMT -5
I am still not clear on what he is arguing about. Is he saying E-M35 has an European origin? He can’t be serious! The Natufians are essentially E-M35 so I assume he is suggesting that Natufians came from Europe(insert Sarcasm). I guessed he missed Lazaridis claim that Natufians have a African origin. Did E-M35 “back-migrated” into Africa from Europe? Granted E-M2 is relatively young. But E-M2 has an East African origin just as E-M35. He also missed the fact that paraclades of E-M35 are found deep within southern Africa(San/Sandawe). Significance? Africans diverging from a central source ie the Great Lakes to the North , North West , across the Red Sea and deep to the South in Africa. I assume also he will focus on producing data instead of foul language and name calling. Egyptsearch is better suited for that. On ESR here we can have a civil discussion and produce data to back it up. He isn’t well-read because he will know that indeed modern Europeans are a subset of Africans. As RECENT data has shown down to the depigment skin came from Africans migrating into Europe about 6000BC. And my man. We are going to have a discussion where we go in circles. I have produced data showing supposed and falsely identified “Neanderthal ancestry” is found deep within Southern Africa debunking your naïve claim, which has long been corrected, of SSA having no such ancestry. Once you have understand and accept that fact we can go on to the next lesson or topic. I debate my equals , all others I teach. @ Brada. I assume his language will be cleaned up with a warning. We are open to civil discussion at this site. NATUFIANS carried E-Z830 and MTDNA N en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natufian_culture#GeneticsLIGHT SKIN ORIGINATED WITH NEANDERTHALS BECAUSE MODERN HUMANS INTERBRED WITH NEANDERTHALS IN THE MID EAST! WHITE SKIN ORIGINATED WITH THE VERY WHITE MIDDLE EASTERN FARMERS in EUROPE, NORTH AFRICA AND EGYPT! WHITE SKIN HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH BLACK AFRICANS OR ALBINOS!!! Got it Einstein?  ? |
|
|
|
Post by anansi on Sept 15, 2016 8:07:09 GMT -5
@ Jetro since you are a "race" man and like to typecaste here is some raw but dated news about skulls and bones.
Klik the link for more, now understand we usually do not go into "oid" terms but since that is the term you understand then read the above and klik the link.
|
|
|
|
Post by zarahan on Sept 15, 2016 15:41:14 GMT -5
Jethro's consolidated: I ONLY BELIEVE GENUINE SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH SITES AND WIKI!
WIKI STATES THE NATUFIANS CARRIED E-Z830 and the VERY EURASIAN MTDNA N
E-Z830 ORIGINATED IN NORTH AFRICA AMONGST THE VERY INDIGENOUS NORTH AFRICAN CAUCASIANS!
EINSTEIN CARRIED E-Z830 as HIS MAIN Y-DNA! Does he resemble a SSA??? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
------------------------------
ANY BLACK AFRICANS CARRYING E-Z830 would have got it from a back migration of NORTH AFRICANS!
FIRST MODERN MAN ABSOLUTELY EVERYWHERE WAS THE CAUCASIAN CRO-MAGNON and his skull is found throughout the world including in SOUTH AFRICA AND EGYPT!
37 000 year old NAZLET KHATER MAN OF EGYPT WAS A CAUCASIAN UPPER PALEOLITHIC EUROPEAN as was 36 000 year old South African HOFMEYR MAN!
ANCIENT 13 000 RACE WAR BETWEEN NORTH AFRICAN CAUCASIANS and black Africans in Northern Sudan:
www.independent.co.uk/news/science/archaeology/saharan-remains-may-be-evidence-of-first-race-war-13000-years-ago-9603632.html
Afronazis just cannot accept reality! NORTH AFRICA HAS ALWAYS BEEN CAUCASIAN GOING BACK TO THE VERY FIRST MODERN MAN the very CAUCASIAN CRO-MAGNON!!!!
LOL SO WIKI IS DOCTORED! SO TYPICAL OF DUMBAZZ AFRONAZIS that cant face reality! Facts are, YOUR LINKS ARE OUT OF DATE and the other LINKS ARE NOT GENUINE SCIENTIFIC RESPECTED LINKS!
THERE WERE NEVER EVER ANY BLACK AFRICANS IN EURASIAN EVER!!!
N*GR***DS ARE ONLY 8000 years old:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asselar_man
CAUCASIANS are 45 000 years old:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurignacian
FIRST EUROPEANS WERE HEAVILY MIXED WITH NEANDERTHALS and looked FCK ALL like N*GR***DS that didnt even exist at the time! [/b] ------------------=============================================--------- LOL at "Jethro"'s nonsense. Let's debunk it again: Debunk 4- Wiki- You or your buddies no doubt have gone into Wikipedia and doctored pages, and then you come back to talk about "information you found on WIki" as if its such a great "treasure trove." How laughable. But let's take what you say at face value and look at your own "supporting Wiki reference." Wiki says that Haplogroup E-z830 forms a subclade of z827, which in turn is a sub-clade of M35. Whatever the naming, the major ancestral cluster originated in Africa. There goes your "Eurasian" blather up in smoke based on your own "supporting reference." Debunk 5- You say the Natufians carry ez380 a "very Eurasian" DNA. But your own Wikipedia set of articles cites Lizardis who specifically notes the African DNA elements among Natufians. XYZ has highlighted THE SAME article above in detail and when you look at the actual scholar's article rather than doctored Wiki write-ups, your "white Natufian" claim becomes nonsense.  ^^Whoops- there you go again, debunked by your own "supporting" reference. Debunk 6- you say "FIRST MODERN MAN ABSOLUTELY EVERYWHERE WAS THE CAUCASIAN CRO-MAGNON and his skull is found throughout the world including in SOUTH AFRICA AND EGYPT!" Actually as Brada so succintly points out there were no "Caucasians" around at the time. And one of the earliest modern humans actually clusters with tropical or "sub-Saharan" Africans. You fail again, and by the way- we know the name of the early modern from your own place- Wikipedia, which points us to an actual credible scientist's source. Thanks for the pointer, which by the way, - has caused you to lose again.  Debunk 7 You said: "37 000 year old NAZLET KHATER MAN OF EGYPT WAS A CAUCASIAN UPPER PALEOLITHIC EUROPEAN" So let's get this straight. Said European migrated into ancient Egypt some tens of thousands of years ago- right?  As for the hoped for "negro free Cro-magnons" alack and alas, you fail there too.. Debunk 8 WHITE SKIN ORIGINATED IN CENTRAL ASIA about 9000 years ago and was taken into EUROPE BY THE VERY WHITE MIDDLE EASTERN FARMERS
READ SUPER SLOWLY:
www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/04/how-europeans-evolved-white-skin LOL do you realize hat yet again you debunk yourself with your own "supporting" reference? It says: "Most modern Europeans don’t look much like those of 8000 years ago."
This confirms BRada's point, whereas you are still contradicting yourself with your white Cro-magnons
circa 45,000 years ago.
It also says:
[o]"The modern humans who came out of Africa to originally settle Europe about 40,000 years are presumed to have had dark skin, which is advantageous in sunny latitudes. And the new data confirm that about 8500 years ago, early hunter-gatherers in Spain, Luxembourg, and Hungary also had darker skin: They lacked versions of two genes—SLC24A5 and SLC45A2—that lead to depigmentation and, therefore, pale skin in Europeans today." LOL you have destroyed your "ancient Caucasoids" claim with your own reference.  So let's see. Your very own "supporting references" debunk every point you are trying to make. But don't tell us. You will now go back to Wiki to doctor and "massage" the text to "spin" additional distortion eh? Then you will report back on what you "found." LOL. GO ahead, and also hunker down to "guard" your changes. Unfortunately for you, people already have more accurate data based on the actual scholars. All your effort fails- an exercise in irrelevance. But carry on! |
|
?