|
|
Post by Atlantid on Oct 14, 2012 19:09:04 GMT -5
Certainly an Afrocentric book, working from a literalist Biblical perspective. On the preview on Amazon, page 20-21, the author claims the ancient egyptians were "Black" and not Caucasian and elsewhere attacks race theorists like Gobineau. www.amazon.co.uk/Faces-Hamitic-People-Khamit-Raamah/dp/1453500510#reader_1453500510"The reason for the denial of the Hamitic race is clear. Thy have said time after time that blacks are not capable of anything great" (p. 21) However then on page 23-24 the author claims the Egyptians were "not all Black, but multicoloured" but still Hamitic. This is an Afrocentric idiot who thinks "Black" or races = mere skin colour. The funny thing is that in the introduction he claims to have a degree in forensic science.  He obviously doesn't know the slightest thing about racial anthropology. Yes I read the book and that was one of the things that also saw, and this is why I pointed out that the Melanine works perfectly because we have the Darker Ethiopians/Sudan and Eritreans among the blacks then Brownish or Egyptina, Morrocans, Palestinians, Lybians and Latin Americans, and the the White but not Caucasian Greeks, South Italians, Albanians, Kosovars, Macedonians among othes. So the book gave me an Introduction an opened my eyes, however I am trying to contact the author so he can make a second book and basically introduce the Balkans and South Italians as part of the Hamitic Branch, or the Fallen Hamitic Roman Empire, which has only survive by the Hamitic Roman Catholic Church to this day. What exactly is your position? Are you saying you believe Noah had three son's of whom all these ethnic groups descend? Do you also believe in a global flood, Adam and Eve etc? |
|
|
|
Post by Atlantid on Oct 14, 2012 19:29:37 GMT -5
I see where you're coming from. But your post above seems to miss the point again: skin color is just one superficial trait. Only the genetics actually controlling that trait matter. And the genetic variant in question links, in varying degrees, all Caucasoid origin peoples. That includes the various light brown-to-dark brown Hamitic peoples in North Africa and the Horn. Do Pygmies and Capoids share any close connection in skin pigmentation in terms of their genetics? |
|
|
|
Post by Noah on Oct 15, 2012 17:19:53 GMT -5
Do Pygmies and Capoids share any close connection in skin pigmentation in terms of their genetics? As a matter of fact they do. However, due to some Hamitic/Caucasoid admixture (mainly in the Hottentot/Khoi), a minority of Khoisan have the same aforementioned allele that is most common in West Eurasians. A few Maasai and New World Blacks also do for the same reason, as expected.
Hamiticev13's view seems to be largely based on Giuseppe Sergi's seminal work (his The Mediterranean Race is in the Hamitic Library), with certain ancillary influences from the Faces of the Hamitic People book. |
|
|
|
Post by hamiticev13 on Oct 19, 2012 22:34:11 GMT -5
Highly civilized Egyptians? they are mostly E-M35s so what difference would be of the E-M35 Sudanese or Eritrean or Ethipians?
This reminds me of the unfortunate event on Rwanda were the Tutsis largely E-M35 were genocide just because the others though they were superior and smarter and lead to the worst crime against E-M35 on the 21 century.
|
|
|
|
Post by hamiticev13 on Oct 19, 2012 22:35:45 GMT -5
Anyway aside from the sad part of the fallen E-M35 brothers, there are another E-M35 E-V13 Hamitic people I like the most the Kosovars www.youtube.com/watch?v=ciH9JLDevg4The E-V13 DNA of Kosovo Known previously as Dardania on the Greek Mythology Zeus was the Father of Dardanus on the Bible Nimrod is the root ancestor of Dardanus Nimrod was know as ZEUS |
|
|
|
Post by Noah on Oct 19, 2012 22:53:06 GMT -5
Highly civilized Egyptians? they are mostly E-M35s so what difference would be of the E-M35 Sudanese or Eritrean or Ethipians? There's little difference because Eritreans, Somalis, Ethiopians and North Sudanese are (for the most part, anyhow) Hamitic origin peoples too, with great civilizations and monuments of their own. This reminds me of the unfortunate event on Rwanda were the Tutsis largely E-M35 were genocide just because the others though they were superior and smarter and lead to the worst crime against E-M35 on the 21 century. Actually, it's quite unrelated since Tutsis are Negroid-origin peoples. That's where they overwhelmingly cluster in terms of autosomal DNA. They also largely belong to the same E1b1a paternal clade as the Hutus and other Bantus (a haplogroup which, by the way, was originally associated with Hamitic peoples but later crossed over into the Negroid community -- see the earlier parts of the thread). |
|
|
|
Post by Noah on Oct 19, 2012 22:59:24 GMT -5
Anyway aside from the sad part of the fallen E-M35 brothers, there are another E-M35 E-V13 Hamitic people I like the most the Kosovars www.youtube.com/watch?v=ciH9JLDevg4The E-V13 DNA of Kosovo Known previously as Dardania on the Greek Mythology Zeus was the Father of Dardanus on the Bible Nimrod is the root ancestor of Dardanus Nimrod was know as ZEUS That video seems to be quite similar to what you posted earlier. I can't quite make out some of the charts in it, though. |
|
|
|
Post by Atlantid on Oct 23, 2012 2:04:50 GMT -5
Noah, I have a question:
Regarding haplogroups, how do you detect where they arose? For example Haplogroup L3 (mtDNA) is claimed to have originated in East Africa. However how is that known?
|
|
|
|
Post by Noah on Oct 23, 2012 19:52:03 GMT -5
Noah, I have a question: Regarding haplogroups, how do you detect where they arose? For example Haplogroup L3 (mtDNA) is claimed to have originated in East Africa. However how is that known? Researchers look at several different genetic factors to determine a haplogroup's likely place of origin. Chief among these are: 1) Where the highest frequencies of the haplogroup are presently found i.e. which population has the highest percentage of clade bearers. 2) Where the greatest genetic diversity is found. In other words, which modern population/geographical area has the most sub-clades of that haplogroup. This suggests to researchers that the clade has been in that area long enough to have acquired many new defining mutations (since they each typically take many generations to accrue). 3) What is the actual size of that clade-bearing population. This matters because it determines the absolute number of haplogroup carriers in a given region relative to other regions. For instance, a small 10,000-strong population with a high 65% frequency of haplogroup E1b1b necessarily has fewer clade bearers in absolute terms than a much larger population of 1,000,000 people with a low frequency of only 1% (6,500 vs. 10,000 clade bearers). 4) Whether there are any other high or moderate frequency clade-bearing populations nearby. Finding this out allows researchers to determine whether or not the haplogroup's presence in that region is due to genetic drift or whether it is suggestive of a greater original range of distribution for the clade. For example, about 30% of the Hottentot/Khoi in Southern Africa (who number maybe around 5000 individuals in total) are E1b1b carriers. However, few if any other populations in the area exceed the 10% mark for the haplogroup. So this fact, coupled with the Hottentot/Khoi's small population size, tells us that the clade was likely introduced to this particular population but not to their present-day San and Bantu neighbours. 5) Which population/geographical area has the highest frequencies of the haplogroup's most basal lineage. For example, in the case of haplogroup DE, that would be Tibet, Syria and West Africa since those are the only areas where DE* (basal DE) has so far been found. Now, although the above points may look like comprehensive criteria for determining a haplogroup's place of origin, they are actually by themselves insufficient. One must also consider inter-population contacts, linguistic and osteological evidence along with other lines of data to properly interpret those frequency patterns. |
|
|
|
Post by hamiticsister101 on Nov 10, 2012 23:12:28 GMT -5
Scientists all in all confirm that the Biblical flood was a real flood that occured in the Black Sea just around Anatolia and Georgia, the Bible does say that Noah's Ark landed on Mount Ararat which is in Turkey so it has some credibility in that sense. The Bible however is the story of Caucasians and no other race, Adam and Eve were Caucasians, Japheth, Ham, and Shem were also Caucasians, etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by Atlantid on Nov 11, 2012 18:57:06 GMT -5
Scientists all in all confirm that the Biblical flood was a real flood that occured in the Black Sea just around Anatolia and Georgia, the Bible does say that Noah's Ark landed on Mount Ararat which is in Turkey so it has some credibility in that sense. The Bible however is the story of Caucasians and no other race, Adam and Eve were Caucasians, Japheth, Ham, and Shem were also Caucasians, etc. I would disagree with the Black sea theory of the Biblical flood. Most likely it was rooted in localized flooding in Mesopotamia. Leonard Woolley identified a flood strata at Ur, however other floods that run through various cities have been proposed. The prototype of Noah is also the Sumerian/Babylonian flood hero. Interestingly the Dead Sea Scrolls describe Noah as red haired. The Biblicl flood myth was probably rooted in a rule Sumerian or Babylonian local ruler who built a boat to escape the flood. Probably he took some things on board with him including his animal pets (Sumerian rulers owned their own zoo's) and that is probably how the whole story about all the animals on the ark arose, but was greatly exaggerated over time. |
|
|
|
Post by hamiticsister101 on Nov 15, 2012 22:37:21 GMT -5
His name in the Sumerian texts is Utnapishtim and he was from Ur (the same place as Abraham and all the Patriarchs). The Sumerians were always called "black headed" and the early inhabitants of the area were Elamites, Sumerians, and Susites and Kushites/Kasshites who were all called "Eastern Ethiopians" these people were Dravidian Caucasian type of people who were black skinned, but never the less Caucasian. They were the first Caucasians, the first civilization builders.
|
|
|
|
Post by Atlantid on Nov 16, 2012 12:51:45 GMT -5
"Black headed" refers to hair colour, not skin pigment. The term derived so the Sumerians contrasted themselves to blondes in the same region: "This implies that there was also a blond race in the country from which their black hair and eyes distinguish them." - Sayce, Archibald. (1930). "The Antiquity of Civilized Man". JRAI. Vol. 60, Jul. - Dec. pp. 269-282 Who were these blondes? Most likely Indo-European tribes, some of whom even intermarried with the Sumerian royals, as some of the artwork would appear to suggest. These Indo-European tribes are also described as blonde in Mesopotamian sources. The Gutians are described as namrûtum, meaning "light colored" or "fair" (Gelb, 1944). Also note that Leonard Woolley in his classic study The Sumerians describes the Gutians as blonde: "in the Zagros hills and across the plain to the Tigris, there lived a people [...] fair haired". The racial composition of prehistoric and ancient Mesopotamia has always been a problem because of the extreme mixture of morphological types, however most are Caucasoid. There seems though to have been an Australoid substratum, and early skulls at Ubaid match those in the Indus Valley. "The people who originated civilization in Sumeria and the Indus Valley may have been Mediterranid---, or may have belonged to the somewhat similar Capellid taxon, or may indeed have belonged to both, and may have included hybrids between the two." (Baker, 1974) This Capellid taxon is disputed. Because while folks like Noah regard it as an early robust Caucasoid type (Baker calls it Combe-Capellid) others regard it as Australoid. By the Neolithic though, there were certainly Mediterranids in this region, later with a brachycelphalic Bronze Age Alpine and Armenoid presence:  |
|
|
|
Post by Noah on Nov 16, 2012 23:01:01 GMT -5
Another thing worth considering is that the brown-skinned Socotrans have a notable incidence of blondism, and they ultimately migrated to Socotra from Arabia. That's a stone's throw away from Mesopotamia.
This Capellid taxon is disputed. Because while folks like Noah regard it as an early robust Caucasoid type (Baker calls it Combe-Capellid) others regard it as Australoid. What do you make of the Combe Capelle reconstruction below? Archaic Caucasoid? Australoid? It's from the San Diego Museum of Man. Combe Capelle: |
|
|
|
Post by Atlantid on Nov 18, 2012 16:43:05 GMT -5
What do you make of the Combe Capelle reconstruction below? Archaic Caucasoid? Australoid? It's from the San Diego Museum of Man. It looks Australoid, particularly Murrayian. This latter taxon is always disputed. Joseph Birdsell maintained they were linked to Ainuids (quasi-Caucasoids), while others such as Abbie (1951) regarded them as a localized subtype of the Australoid. This debate has never been resolved. Here is an Ainuid -  |
|
He obviously doesn't know the slightest thing about racial anthropology.
