[noemon]

Am not in your mind.

Assuming that you wanted to say that race is an irrelevant concept you could have agreed with Igor and be done with it. You on the other hand, attempted to redefine the taxonomy of racial anthropology, like Kumatto has been trying to do all along. Kumatto has not been trying to argue against racial taxonomy, he has been trying to redefine racial taxonomy so that it suits his Afrocentric narrative.

[Doctor State]

Assuming that you wanted to say that race is an irrelevant concept you could have agreed with Igor and be done with it.

Except I don't agree with Igor. I don't consider Libyans "mixed." I consider them a member of no race at all.

And if I understand correctly, a Nordicist would consider them a race, or consider them mixed.

I don't buy into the idea that in the old days everyone was a race, but now we've mongrelized. I think some people are genetically part of a race or races, and some people are not.

I'm fine with people categorizing people as races, I just think it's funny when they try to apply it to everybody instead of just the obvious cases.

[noemon]

Your post is non-sensical.

Who, what, where and when? Are all up in the air. Discussion up in the air cannot take place, until you clarify what it is you want to argue and learn how it can be phrased, I suggest you refrain from posting.

You asked me how you should have phrased "it"?

Phrased what? Am not in your mind as I said.

Assuming that you want to say race is an irrelevant concept? Is that what you wanted to say?

You could have agreed with Igor, who makes the point illuminating. At least much more illuminating than you do.

Your non-sensical post, makes no point that I can recognize. What does "no race" mean? Anthropological taxonomy encompasses all people in the planet according to anthropometric characteristics. Who said Libyans were "mixed"? Who said Nordicists would consider Libyans mixed?

What is the point, if one made that assertion or lack there of?

Obviously, people who are not clearly members of one race or another and share characteristics of 2 or more are hybrids according to the anthropometric taxonomy referred to as racial anthropology.

[Doctor State]

I'm sorry, I'm really trying to understand what you're saying but I really don't. I'll keep asking questions until I hit on something I understand.

What do Nordicists consider Libyans?

What is anthropological taxonomy other than what it sounds like?

I didn't say "I agree with Igor" because I don't believe dog breeds are a good analogy, at least not the way he presented them. If he had said "some dogs are not any breed, they're just dogs," I would have agreed with him.

And no, people who share characteristics of two races are not necessarily hybrids. Some of these supposed "hybrids" could predate the races they were allegedly hybrids of.

[noemon]

I'm sorry, I'm really trying to understand what you're saying but I really don't. I'll keep asking questions until I hit on something I understand.

Are you joking? I merely corrected your sentence, after I corrected your sentence above, you have been just talking...and making no sense, since then I have been trying to understand what are you trying to say, and still I cannot get. I have not said anything that you allegedly dont understand, in fact aside from correcting you, I have not said anything at all. And I am the one who asked questions in the previous post so that I understand what it is you want to say. Aside from correcting you above with the proper X's, and Y's I have not been trying to say anything, you are the one who has been trying to say something, to obfuscate probably the fact, that your demarcation was simply wrong and since then, you just blather around, like a guy who simply posts in order to pretend that he has something to say.

What do Nordicists consider Libyans?

How the heck should I know?

What is anthropological taxonomy other than what it sounds like?

Eh?

I didn't say "I agree with Igor" because I don't believe dog breeds are a good analogy, at least not the way he presented them. If he had said "some dogs are not any breed, they're just dogs," I would have agreed with him.

More eh?

And no, people who share characteristics of two races are not necessarily hybrids. Some of these supposed "hybrids" could predate the races they were allegedly hybrids of.

As a general rule they are, and within the context of racial anthropology, they are categorized as hybrids, exceptions are exceptions and do not make the rule.

[Zyx]

Doctor State, you should realize that noemon is the only one internalizing the "Nordicist" viewpoint, and instead of taking general discussions on the matter, he will insult and berate others ignorantly in a hifalutin and irrelevant manner for days on end.

We all understand what you meant Doctor State, noemon is just having difficulties with being normal.

I'm no Afrocentrist--I merely came across a claim, said it, researched it and confirmed it: noemon, claims that according to a Nordicist I am merely an Afrocentrist.

Forget it Doctor State, noemon is a waste of time in this discussion.

And you are entirely wrong in your example. Natural selection doesn't necessarily have to follow the same paths that were followed in the past.

Indeed, the genotype may be different for a phenotype, but to deny that a similar phenotype will arise is ludicrous.

Evolution is NOT teleological.

So then what is natural selection?

. Secondly, contrary to what you say. there were many cases of foreign breeds of plants or animals eradicating indigenous populations upon being introduced in the region.

What is the relevance of this statement?

There is evidence that a people can migrate to another area and take on the indigenous phenotype. There are the "Negroid"* who migrated to Europe and looked like "Caucasoids" and there are the Mongoloids who traveled to Australia and looked like "Australoids;" also the "Mongoloid" who looked like "Native Americans" in the Americas.

Why would you think that a "Caucasoid" migrating to Africa will never look like a "Negroid?"

*I'm only using noemon's bigoted categorizations for discussion purposes here.

[noemon]

Doctor State, you should realize that noemon is the only one internalizing the "Nordicist" viewpoint, and instead of taking general discussions on the matter, he will insult and berate others ignorantly in a hifalutin and irrelevant manner for days on end.

We all understand what you meant Doctor State, noemon is just having difficulties with being normal.

I'm no Afrocentrist--I merely came across a claim, said it, researched it and confirmed it: noemon, claims that according to a Nordicist I am merely an Afrocentrist.

Forget it Doctor State, noemon is a waste of time in this discussion.

You are not just a waste of time, you are also a certified trashed poster, who has been caught numerous times misusing text for his own racialist ends. Begging for some assist from a poster, who doesnt make any sense, is just mere desperation. As for me, being insultive, look at yourself in the mirror, and re-read our discussion, not only I caught you, but you started being condescending even when noone was towards you despite the fact that you had been caught doing propaganda, if you had caught me misusing text like I did, you would have gone in a rampage in several threads for several days, and you would have ended the discussion right there. Yet, here you are trying to hang from wherever you can grab on to save your ridiculation by pretending and posturing. How pathetic.

*I'm only using noemon's bigoted categorizations for discussion purposes here.

Dont try to piss me off, you are the one who has been utilizing racial categories to re-establish your own racial categories, I have been correcting you ever since both in your ridicule as you misused ancient text and as you misused certain biological statements to redefine racial categories and incorporate others under your own racial umbrella. Moreover you have been speaking in my name in this thread without me even being present in the thread, continuing throwing ad homs up in the air only further demonstrates the desperation of your case. As for your theory that a German will turn to Negroid, without mixing with one, if he stays for a couple of generations in Africa, the ridiculousness of such a statement is obvious and profound. At best he 'll get a tan. And perhaps after several thousands of years, he might start resembling a negroid individual. Not from century to century as you argued in the other thread. Blacks have been living in European climate, for some centuries now, and they still dont resemble not even near any white people unless mixed.

[Zyx]

noemon, I never said century to century. Even so, one can imagine that it happens at some point. Never mind, though, I'd rather not carry two consecutive conversations at once: let alone two bad conversations.

I only made one claim in this thread, and you agree with it, so be quiet.

[Doctor State]

How the heck should I know?

Ok I'll go more general: what do Nordicists believe about light brown people? Or even more generally: what do Nordicists believe about anybody?

As a general rule they are, and within the context of racial anthropology, they are categorized as hybrids,

Of what?

exceptions are exceptions and do not make the rule.

I agree. I just think we disagree on the number of exceptions.

[noemon]

noemon, I never said century to century. Even so, one can imagine that it happens at some point. Never mind, though, I'd rather not carry two consecutive conversations at once: let alone two bad conversations.

I only made one claim in this thread, and you agree with it, so be quiet.

You are a trashed poster with an agenda, never forget that. And no I dont agree with the fact that you are utilizing that biological statement to reclassify races, so forget about me being quiet especially when you post in here only to insult me. And you did say from century to century, because that is essentially what separates pre-dynasty to dynasty. And you also conjectured that this small pocket of Black-Africans in the pre-dynasty era must have been a constituent part of what founded dynastical Egypt, when there is no evidence to support that statement, either.

Ok I'll go more general: what do Nordicists believe about light brown people? Or even more generally: what do Nordicists believe about anybody?

Nordic supremacists consider anything that is not Nordic as improper and shit like that. Everybody knows that much. Much like yourself considering Scandinavians as proper white when you wrote the above statement.

Of what?

Of the racial taxonomies.

[ThereBeDragons]

You have been making more assumptions and insults in this thread than KFlint by far.

[noemon]

Who has? And "KFlint"?

[Doctor State]

Nordic supremacists consider anything that is not Nordic as improper and shit like that. Everybody knows that much. Much like yourself considering Scandinavians as proper white when you wrote the above statement.

I'm willing to give that definition to racialists because I don't care about race. Scandinavians are obviously really really white, just as sub-Saharan Africans are really really black. I see no point in arguing against so simple a racial delineation. But that's because it's easy to see those mountaintops. Where I start laughing at the racialists is when they argue over where the mountains end and the valleys begin. Is a Jew a white person? Is a Samoan an Asian? Is a Libyan black? Who cares? Arguing these points takes race past any point of utility. They are all exactly what they look like and nothing more: olive, dark brown, light brown.

[Zyx]

noemon, read the thread. The "Olduvai man" migrated 8,000 years before Egypt started and was an African Black who arguably had "Caucasoid features;" still, only until Egypt started, was the descendants of these people completely categorized as Caucasoids. Before this, say two-thousand years before this, the people were categorically a mixture of Negroid and Caucasoid through natural parallel evolution. I do not even know what you are arguing anymore. You just seem to not accept that a cline can affect evolution.

The modern medical system actually impedes on the assumption of natural selection choosing our phenotype, and my example was more of a heuristic one then one to be taken literally. It's true, but obviously if a medical system overrode natural selection then obviously no phenotype would be advantageous to the next and no natural selection would occur.

As to what we know, clines do have favorable phenotypes.

[ThereBeDragons]

Who has? And "KFlint"?

Actually, just ignore my statement.

[noemon]

noemon, read the thread. The "Olduvai man" migrated 8,000 years before Egypt started and was an African Black who arguably had "Caucasoid features;" still, only until Egypt started, was the descendants of these people completely categorized as Caucasoids. Before this, say two-thousand years before this, the people were categorically a mixture of Negroid and Caucasoid through natural parallel evolution. I do not even know what you are arguing anymore. You just seem to not accept that a cline can affect evolution.

Who said that underlined statement except for you? WHO? Which fucking scientist? Give it up already, you are not a scientist and you have no scientist to back this claim up, so stop abusing biological statements to conform to your pre-conceived narratives. And stop making up straw-men that I allegedly deny clines affecting evolution, stop being such as a tiring poster.

I'm willing to give that definition to racialists because I don't care about race. Scandinavians are obviously really really white, just as sub-Saharan Africans are really really black. I see no point in arguing against so simple a racial delineation. But that's because it's easy to see those mountaintops. Where I start laughing at the racialists is when they argue over where the mountains end and the valleys begin. Is a Jew a white person? Is a Samoan an Asian? Is a Libyan black? Who cares? Arguing these points takes race past any point of utility. They are all exactly what they look like and nothing more: olive, dark brown, light brown.

OK, who said that racial delineation was so simple? A Jew that has Mediterranean features is that, a Nordic Jew is that, a Negroid Jew is that, and other Jews are hybrids. Same goes for the rest, I dont see any point arguing these things either, and the only reason that I am actually arguing these things, is because Kumatto has been trying to reclassify these taxonomies to make them fit his Afrocentric narrative and I have been dragged into this after capturing him posting propaganda by misusing Herodotos. Notice how he also mentions my name in the first page, when I am not even present in the thread. The only person here who cares about these things aside from Dave is in fact Zyx.

[Zyx]

http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0000/000060/006038EB.pdf

See page 3 under predynastic and note the consistency of this 'theory' with upper paleolithic on the same page. If you look at protodynastic where the 'race' transitions despite no external interactions, you'll see that I am not basing my claim off of a lack of evidence.

And why can you not quit calling me Afrocentric. I get it, I put up a picture of an Aframerican so now I must be Afrocentric.

Get real!

[noemon]

See page 3 under predynastic and note the consistency of this 'theory' with upper paleolithic on the same page. If you look at protodynastic where the 'race' transitions despite no external interactions, you'll see that I am not basing my claim off of a lack of evidence.

Your imagination is running wild for there is no such "consistency" as you claim, quote a scientific document that postulates such a theory, or vanish into cyber-text. Stop pretending that you are scientist that figured something out. Get out of the tripe, dude, you are embarrassing yourself.

And why can you not quit calling me Afrocentric. I get it, I put up a picture of an Aframerican so now I must be Afrocentric.

You are an Afrocentric individual with a certified stamp. You have been caught posting propaganda to fit your racial theories, you still cling to an impossible argument to reclassify a racial sub-division under your racial umbrella. You have had all your arguments trashed, you have posted more ad-homs than arguments, and have formulated more straw-men than sentences.

[Einherjar]

You're right. Pitch black Africans are X, stark white Scandinavians are Y, and Mediterraneans are neither.

Obviously Mediterraneans are neither African nor Nordic. This doesn't mean that Mediterraneans are a hybrid of Africans and Nordics. What you and Nordicists do is treat African and Nordic as racial absolutes with which other types can be juxtaposed.

So then what is natural selection?

One of the backbones of evolution, along with mutation. How does this address the non-teleological nature of evolution I wonder?

[Doctor State]

Obviously Mediterraneans are neither African nor Nordic. This doesn't mean that Mediterraneans are a hybrid of Africans and Nordics. What you and Nordicists do is treat African and Nordic as racial absolutes with which other types can be juxtaposed.

Except I've been arguing this entire time against the hybrid camp. I think the Mediterranean look came first. I think the human race is generally brown, with a few regional extremes that came about more recently due to isolation. At the most, light brown came about shortly after black, but almost definitely predates white.

So basically you didn't just get my meaning wrong, but actually completely backwards. It's not easy to achieve your currently level of misunderstanding, but you pulled it off.