Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Question on skin color of Amerindians

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 1798
    replied
    Originally posted by thetick View Post
    MMaddi: Very well said in the above comments. Much better then I would stated the same sentiment.

    1798: You sure state like you definitely know based on the your posts MMaddi pointed out above.
    What is it to you?

    Leave a comment:


  • thetick
    replied
    Originally posted by 1798 View Post
    I don't know if the number of farmers that came from Anatolia made a great impact on the Irish gene pool.
    MMaddi: Very well said in the above comments. Much better then I would stated the same sentiment.

    1798: You sure state like you definitely know based on the your posts MMaddi pointed out above.

    Leave a comment:


  • 1798
    replied
    Originally posted by MMaddi View Post
    And do some of those migrations come from outside Europe, in your estimation? A simple yes or no, please.
    I don't know if the number of farmers that came from Anatolia made a great impact on the Irish gene pool.

    Leave a comment:


  • MMaddi
    replied
    Originally posted by 1798 View Post
    I did not say that I was pure Irish. The Irish gene pool comes made from all the migrations that happened over the last 10,000 years.
    And do some of those migrations come from outside Europe, in your estimation? A simple yes or no, please.

    Leave a comment:


  • 1798
    replied
    Originally posted by MMaddi View Post
    No, we have a problem with anyone who has foolish beliefs that he stubbornly sticks to, without much evidence to back them up. The fact that you're Irish has nothing to do with your foolishness. As I've posted once before, I'm sure that true Irish nationalists roll their eyes whenever you start waxing romantic about your Irish purity.

    It is the case that you've backed off somewhat from your past insistence that all your ancestry is Irish for over 10,000 years, which certainly gave the impression that you believe that you're "pure Irish." You've also denied the effects of migrations and population replacement in Europe in the last 10,000 years, although recently you seem to accept that non-Europeans brought agriculture to Europe during the Neolithic period.

    So, I was about to concede that you've taken a step to admitting you might not be "pure Irish" as you had insisted before. Then I came acrosss this statement by you in a post in another thread this morning: "I think that my autosomal dna results represents the Irish gene pool since the last Ice-Age." This was posted at http://forums.familytreedna.com/show...5&postcount=29.

    You really can't help yourself. You make a move toward a rational position, but still in your heart of hearts hold on to the romantic notion that you're "pure Irish."
    I did not say that I was pure Irish. The Irish gene pool comes made from all the migrations that happened over the last 10,000 years.

    Leave a comment:


  • MMaddi
    replied
    Originally posted by 1798 View Post
    Another personal attack.

    You seem to have a problem with anyone who is Irish. I never posted anything about being pure Irish or that the Irish are superior to other ethnic groups.
    No, we have a problem with anyone who has foolish beliefs that he stubbornly sticks to, without much evidence to back them up. The fact that you're Irish has nothing to do with your foolishness. As I've posted once before, I'm sure that true Irish nationalists roll their eyes whenever you start waxing romantic about your Irish purity.

    It is the case that you've backed off somewhat from your past insistence that all your ancestry is Irish for over 10,000 years, which certainly gave the impression that you believe that you're "pure Irish." You've also denied the effects of migrations and population replacement in Europe in the last 10,000 years, although recently you seem to accept that non-Europeans brought agriculture to Europe during the Neolithic period.

    So, I was about to concede that you've taken a step to admitting you might not be "pure Irish" as you had insisted before. Then I came acrosss this statement by you in a post in another thread this morning: "I think that my autosomal dna results represents the Irish gene pool since the last Ice-Age." This was posted at http://forums.familytreedna.com/show...5&postcount=29.

    You really can't help yourself. You make a move toward a rational position, but still in your heart of hearts hold on to the romantic notion that you're "pure Irish."

    Leave a comment:


  • 1798
    replied
    quote removed

    Another personal attack.

    You seem to have a problem with anyone who is Irish. I never posted anything about being pure Irish or that the Irish are superior to other ethnic groups.

    Leave a comment:


  • 1798
    replied
    Originally posted by T E Peterman View Post
    Gravity is only a theory.

    Theories are accepted as such by science as long as they can account for all of the facts. As soon as a fact is found that the theory can't account for, the theory needs to be either modified or replaced.

    The Out of Africa Theory is still accepted by most because it accounts for all of the relevant facts. Nothing has been found that is contradictory.

    The innuendo in your message makes me wonder if this markes the grand debut of your new "Out of Ireland" hypothesis...

    Timothy Peterman
    "Out of the Ardennes" sounds better.

    Leave a comment:


  • T E Peterman
    replied
    Gravity is only a theory.

    Theories are accepted as such by science as long as they can account for all of the facts. As soon as a fact is found that the theory can't account for, the theory needs to be either modified or replaced.

    The Out of Africa Theory is still accepted by most because it accounts for all of the relevant facts. Nothing has been found that is contradictory.

    The innuendo in your message makes me wonder if this markes the grand debut of your new "Out of Ireland" hypothesis...

    Timothy Peterman

    Leave a comment:


  • 1798
    replied
    Originally posted by James78 View Post
    It would depend upon what theory you want to believe for north American Indians arriving in NA.

    The land bridge did, after all, meant that their forefathers would have come from more northern - and hence paler skinned - populations than from let's say Africa. There is also the fact that Clovis proved Asians (by boat if I remember) are the predominant forefather to NA Indians than any other society.

    The reason for aboriginals of Australia / New Zealand being dark is still. Longer population arrival and also the fact that being more southern simple genetic drift via sailers / lost fishermen, etc. from such areas of Africa itself or India even would have been easier to achieve than going west across a massive ocean in simple boats.


    It won't matter, as someone who has a bachelors in aboriginals studies and knows many true aboriginals [not metis or mix breeds], as it is the NA governments seek to destroy the cultures even now. Just read any of the government sites on Indian "status", Canada's is more obvious than USA, and true aboriginal blood is severely diluted in many populations. I mean how on earth does a half Indian + half Indian make a full Indian, genetics don't work that simply.


    And to 1798 as a white person who knows many black people, including many whom I would not pause one second to call superior to the white welfare "tripe" to name them nicely I see loitering on the streets in the local city, your borderline racist comments are annoying and add absolutely nothing to most conversations.

    I'll make it simple.

    Whites are merely blacks with a mutated skin gene and a handful of other mutations attributed to evolutionary needs.

    Since you seem to think blacks are "apes", I got news for you... you and every other white person out there is nothing more than a white "ape".

    Otherwise whites are just the spawn of some alien.
    I don't know what you are on about. Out of Africa is only a theory. The AMH could have originated in Europe. The mutation could have happened the other way around and we humans are all descended from an ape is another myth. We cannot talk about skin colour without some people getting upset.

    Leave a comment:


  • James78
    replied
    It would depend upon what theory you want to believe for north American Indians arriving in NA.

    The land bridge did, after all, meant that their forefathers would have come from more northern - and hence paler skinned - populations than from let's say Africa. There is also the fact that Clovis proved Asians (by boat if I remember) are the predominant forefather to NA Indians than any other society.

    The reason for aboriginals of Australia / New Zealand being dark is still. Longer population arrival and also the fact that being more southern simple genetic drift via sailers / lost fishermen, etc. from such areas of Africa itself or India even would have been easier to achieve than going west across a massive ocean in simple boats.


    It won't matter, as someone who has a bachelors in aboriginals studies and knows many true aboriginals [not metis or mix breeds], as it is the NA governments seek to destroy the cultures even now. Just read any of the government sites on Indian "status", Canada's is more obvious than USA, and true aboriginal blood is severely diluted in many populations. I mean how on earth does a half Indian + half Indian make a full Indian, genetics don't work that simply.


    And to 1798 as a white person who knows many black people, including many whom I would not pause one second to call superior to the white welfare "tripe" to name them nicely I see loitering on the streets in the local city, your borderline racist comments are annoying and add absolutely nothing to most conversations.

    I'll make it simple.

    Whites are merely blacks with a mutated skin gene and a handful of other mutations attributed to evolutionary needs.

    Since you seem to think blacks are "apes", I got news for you... you and every other white person out there is nothing more than a white "ape".

    Otherwise whites are just the spawn of some alien.

    Leave a comment:


  • Subwoofer
    replied
    Originally posted by 1798 View Post
    Okay.

    What colour of skin does North American Indians have and why? Do you know the SNPs that are associated with the colour?
    Over the centuries the various ethnic groups have got mixed up in the Americas so it's not really a very good area to focus on when it comes to phenotypes.

    http://journals.plos.org/plosgenetic...l.pgen.1004572

    THe whole subject isn't that well understood anyway but this wiki article is quite intresting

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_skin_color

    BTW another big difference between humans and other primates other than furriness is human sweat glands that we evolved to help keep cool, both these mutations are of course unlikely to have occurred in cooler parts of the globe.

    http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/...1/Sweat-glands

    Leave a comment:


  • 1798
    replied
    Originally posted by AFH View Post
    This thread is about American Indians if you want to discuss African people or European people I would appreciate it you do it on another thread I don't appreciate you hijacking this thread.
    Okay.

    What colour of skin does North American Indians have and why? Do you know the SNPs that are associated with the colour?

    Leave a comment:


  • AFH
    replied
    Originally posted by 1798 View Post
    It could mean that the ancestors of the African people were light skinned and that is important.
    This thread is about American Indians if you want to discuss African people or European people I would appreciate it you do it on another thread I don't appreciate you hijacking this thread.

    Leave a comment:


  • AFH
    replied
    Originally posted by thetick View Post
    Not sure what you mean by scientific evidence , but American Indians near the equator may have NOT lived in that region long enough for their pigmentation to change.


    Artifacts have been found in Ecuador that are 11,000 years old but perhaps the indigenous people living there now aren't from the same population.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X