R-V88 Among Europeans

Again, you really don't know what "Negroid" means. I'm just being blunt. Your education has failed you, and any work you've done as a forensic anthropologist should be reviewed due to gross incompetence.

By your reckoning, you would find Sendhil Ramamurthy's body in some Louisianan swamp and declare them "Negroid" due to their skin color, whilst ignoring the fact they're, anthropologically-speaking, Caucasian.

Dark skin does not mean "Negroid." You fail.
Oh yeah really, kid? What does Negroid mean then? lmao. My education hasn't failed me. You aren't being blunt; you are mocking me over some possible guilt-complex and are trying to beguile or make up your own reality of events.
 
Take some time and think this through.

Whatever those people from 35,000 years ago looked like, and however they might be defined morphologically, R1b V88 is far too young to have been part of those populations. By 19,000-11,000 years ago, there was already a sweep in motion for depigmentation snps like SLC24A5 in more northerly latitudes, which is where R1b V88 was developing.

The back migration into Africa took place when phenotypes had undoubtedly already changed. You can even see it in the case of Horners. On the old admixture tests they came in as heavily "Caucasoid" admixed. I think that was from a back migration from the Middle East and you can see it in their phenotypes. They look markedly different from SSAs, although they are still very dark skinned, which only makes sense given the amount of annual average solar radiation in their area.

Look at this Oromo Ethiopian woman...or this other East African man. I don't think they're unrepresentative.

ccff89018c40b21f5971ec3c0e9b3206.jpg


73.%20Man%20from%20the%20Raya%20Wollo%20tribe%20at%20Hayk%20market.%20Ethiopia%20.jpg


The only difference with R1b people in the Cameroons is that by the time they got there they were probably already very mixed and little of the original "Middle Eastern" autosomal component was left.
 
Whose theory? Name me one geneticist who agrees with such nonsense. Subsaharan Africans evolved in Subsaharan Africa. And, as has already been explained to you repeatedly, Subsaharan Africans with Y haplotype R1b represent Caucasian pastoralists who back migrated into Africa and intermarried with the locals to the point where they physically resemble other Subsaharan Africans.
Such nonsense right? This is my own theory; but do you have your own explanation? Where is the explanation why Mongolian East Asians and Native Americans carry Y-DNA C; as do Australian Aboriginals? Where did the first haplogroup C mutate? Asia? If the first C man had dark-skin and descended from haplogroup A; then he is most certainly Negroid in origin. Once again, you fail at this and continue arguing over nothing; and wasting everybody's time...
 
Oh yeah really, kid?

Well, that just happened. The guy who appears to be barely out of his teens and a "forensic anthropologist" that doesn't understand basic terminology just called me a "kid." Which, of course, isn't something that incredibly insecure young people do. Wow.

What does Negroid mean then?

Are you at all serious? "What does Negroid mean then?" after being told that it's not simply about dark skin, and your own source (Wiki) explaining it?

You honestly want to marry yourself to this absurd contention that "dark skin = Negroid?"

My education hasn't failed me.

If you claim to understand the concept of "Negroid" due to your "education as a forensic anthropologist" yet consistently mangle the definition and usage...yes, it has.

You aren't being blunt; you are mocking me over some possible guilt-complex and are trying to beguile or make up your own reality of events.

It's obviously the guilt complex. I feel bad for misrepresenting myself as a forensic anthropologist when I'm very obviously not.

That was me, right? Not you?
 
The only difference with R1b people in the Cameroons is that by the time they got there they were probably already very mixed and little of the original "Middle Eastern" autosomal component was left.
Maybe the only way of knowing this is to do an autosomal DNA test on Chadic men and see if they share a small amount of unique, Near Eastern DNA; not found in other SSA populations.
 
I was theorizing. It's only common sense.

Where else did all the other races "Out of Africa" come from? Do you have an explanation? You people still have not got the point. Even if Europeans had tan skin; that means they originally started off as Negroids and then went from black to tan to fair-skin. Oh my gosh. Do I have to make it any more simpler?

Are you saying that it would have been impossible for Subsaharan Africans to become darker than their ancestors? I've noticed that while one sees a variety of skin shades among Mediterranean Caucasians, they are, on average, darker than northern Europeans in a way that doesn't seem to be caused by genetics so I assume it's in response to living in a hotter climate. Even the average Acadian looks a bit darker than the average French Canadian after only about 2.5 centuries in a hotter climate. Humans evolve to suit their environment.
 
You honestly want to marry yourself to this absurd contention that "dark skin = Negroid?"



If you claim to understand the concept of "Negroid" due to your "education as a forensic anthropologist" yet consistently mangle the definition and usage...yes, it has.



It's obviously the guilt complex. I feel bad for misrepresenting myself as a forensic anthropologist when I'm very obviously not.

That was me, right? Not you?
What exactly are you insinuating big stuff? Give me the explanation for Negroid then, smarty. Your personal attacks on me are beside the point, by the way. It wasn't me who started these provocative arguments, it was you; and I was just replying back sarcastically. You have a major guilt-complex for sure.
 
Are you saying that it would have been impossible for Subsaharan Africans to become darker than their ancestors? I've noticed that while one sees a variety of skin shades among Mediterranean Caucasians, they are, on average, darker than northern Europeans in a way that doesn't seem to be caused by genetics so I assume it's in response to living in a hotter climate. Even the average Acadian looks a bit darker than the average French Canadian after only about 2.5 centuries in a hotter climate. Humans evolve to suit their environment.
I never said anything similar or even relative to that. You can even ask sparkey where I'm going with this "theory" of mine. But Alas; you fail to get the point like usual..
 
What exactly are you insinuating big stuff? Give me the explanation for Negroid then, smarty. Your personal attacks on me are beside the point, by the way. It wasn't me who started these provocative arguments, it was you; and I was just replying back sarcastically. You have a major guilt-complex for sure.

You are full of crazy.

You already linked the Wiki definition of "Negroid." That you failed to see it contradicted you isn't my problem.

Of course my personal attacks are beside the point...they're only in response to yours, which are also beside the point. Your point remains wrong.

I have nothing to feel guilty about. You're the one making a fool of yourself.
 
Enough with the personal attacks, both of you. Keep it civil.

Ed. Oh, that was said with my moderator hat on...:)
 
You are full of crazy.

You already linked the Wiki definition of "Negroid." That you failed to see it contradicted you isn't my problem.

Of course my personal attacks are beside the point...they're only in response to yours, which are also beside the point. Your point remains wrong.

I have nothing to feel guilty about. You're the one making a fool of yourself.
Really?

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Negroid


1. (Peoples) denoting, relating to, or belonging to a darker-complexioned supposed racial group of mankind. This group includes the indigenous peoples of Africa south of the Sahara, their descendants elsewhere, and some Melanesian peoples




2. of, designating, or characteristic of one of the traditional racial divisions of humankind, generally marked by brown to black skin, darkeyes, and woolly or crisp hair and including esp. the indigenous peoples of sub-Saharan Africa and their descendants.
 
You are full of crazy.

You already linked the Wiki definition of "Negroid." That you failed to see it contradicted you isn't my problem.

Of course my personal attacks are beside the point...they're only in response to yours, which are also beside the point. Your point remains wrong.

I have nothing to feel guilty about. You're the one making a fool of yourself.
Listen kid, I don't have time to bother with you anymore. Get over yourself or whatever it is you have against me. If you don't get the point, then do not make any more posts.
 
Listen kid...

Lol. Personal attack, the usual usage of which was delineated earlier.

...I don't have time to bother with you anymore.

Of course you do. If you don't, stop posting or admit your theory has huge holes that you can't support.

Get over yourself or whatever it is you have against me. If you don't get the point, then do not make any more posts.

Repeat that to yourself. Seriously.
 
Melancon, a word of advice...when you're in a hole, stop digging. Forget about the definition of "Negroid". It doesn't matter. The point is that by the time that R1b V88 existed and West Eurasians were migrating back to Africa, they no longer looked like Kostenki or whatever. Ok?
 
Such nonsense right? This is my own theory; but do you have your own explanation? Where is the explanation why Mongolian East Asians and Native Americans carry Y-DNA C; as do Australian Aboriginals? Where did the first haplogroup C mutate? Asia? If the first C man had dark-skin and descended from haplogroup A; then he is most certainly Negroid in origin. Once again, you fail at this and continue arguing over nothing; and wasting everybody's time...

Do you consider Australoids to be Negroids and what about Melanesians and Veddahs?
 
Do you consider Australoids to be Negroids and what about Melanesians and Veddahs?
Yes, they are all Negroids. Some unprofessional amateurs here who have no study or credibility in the field of Anthropology would only believe the contrary.

I had to repeat myself to a user named Aberdeen here so many times to try and get my point across; but Alas, he can't get his fixation that "race doesn't exist" out of his mind. :rolleyes:

He also believes that the original Out-of-Africa humans were not of the Negroid racial classification ... which is such a joke because all evidence and logic points to that reality. Y-DNA Haplogroup C people most definitely weren't originally fair-skinned or even tan-skinned people. :rolleyes:
 
Melancon, a word of advice...when you're in a hole, stop digging. Forget about the definition of "Negroid". It doesn't matter. The point is that by the time that R1b V88 existed and West Eurasians were migrating back to Africa, they no longer looked like Kostenki or whatever. Ok?
I'm not in a hole; as I stated before, I am a professional Forensic anthropologist myself. And I see mummies and corpses pretty often. You cannot stump me in a logical foxhole; the answers are so simple as to look it up in a dictionary... Look up the word Negroid in a dictionary and see what it says. Apparently the Negroid racial classification has nothing to do with dark-skin; as it's own Indo-European name seemed to originally suggest. My dad is also a professional Forensic scientist himself. But you people really give me something to laugh about because most of you are such a pitiful joke. I really cannot believe this argument against my theorizing exists; but it seems to be a reality because I am still debating it......

I could be wrong. Does it really matter? I just think that the current Out of Africa theory makes no sense.
 

This thread has been viewed 115905 times.

Back
Top