Jump to content

Coronavirus patent documents, Trump attempted purchase of vaccine, and mass media manipulation


Kareem

Recommended Posts

Chev


Now, I read this too, and this is alarming. I mean, there was a significant earthquake in, I think it was, Idaho!?


There were major ones in both Idaho and Utah.

Also, it's good that you recognize that the "Anti-Christ" character is not part of Biblical theology but was actually made up by the early church.
Probably to counter the Islamic influence in the region.

As for your discussion about neanderthals........

You should know that humans didn't come from neanderthals, but rather it was the other way around. Neanderthals were a result of Caucasians who degenerated into a more savage state after they were driven into the mountains.
Eating the wrong foods and mating with close relatives like the Caucasians did for nearly 2000 years will eventually affect the DNA and genetics to the point that you'll produce entire families with deformed and malformed traits such as those found in the bones of neanderthals.

If you doubt this, study the royalty of many European dynasties and how deformed and "weird" a lot of them were because of the custom of marrying and mating with close relatives in an effort to keep the wealth inside the family.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

On 4/6/2020 at 1:36 PM, Chevdove said:

I think maybe scientist do not put out the whole truth because of Separation of Church and State and they do not want to agree with the ancient scriptures.

 

OK now I get it.  Chevdove Science is not obliged to support scripture.  Indeed the scripts are often in direct conflict with science if the scriptures are to be taken literally. If you are looking to tie scripture with science you will always run into problems. The whole conversation about Adam and the Garden of Eden is not something I can engage it, because you apparently believe that there was a guy named Adam who was the first person on Earth and lived in a place called Eden...

 

On 4/7/2020 at 10:33 AM, Pioneer1 said:

Neanderthals were a result of Caucasians who degenerated into a more savage state after they were driven into the mountains.

 

@Pioneer1. Did you just make this up? You know, this has no basis in reality right?

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Troy said:

OK now I get it.  Chevdove Science is not obliged to support scripture.

 

Then @Troy Don't focus on scripture, just the science aspect! 

What I wrote about the BT Haplogroup can stand alone! To date, there has been NO live person with this haplogroup but,

just like extracting DNA from the bones of King Tut and any of our recent dead ancestors, scientist can see the distinct haplogroup.

 

Just like the analysis of any bones, scientist have completely determined that about 6000 years ago, there were many skeletal bones

in that region that showed BLACK AFRICAN-TYPED MALES with the blue-eyes and have the same 'science' as blue-eyed people today, 

that are European. 

 

9 hours ago, Troy said:

If you are looking to tie scripture with science you will always run into problems.

 

So, is that why, after about 200 years this American govt decided to Separate Church & State; to save us the trouble of trying to confirm ancient scripture?

LOL.

People love to say this but strangely, THEY CAN NEVER PRODUCE WHAT THAT ARE REFERRING TO!!!

Discussion is good though. I would patrially agree that ancient scripture is difficult to confirm with science, what with all of the deliberate

mistranslations, but it's not good to just leave it at that, imo.

 

9 hours ago, Troy said:

you apparently believe that there was a guy named Adam who was the first person on Earth and lived in a place called Eden

 

You did not read that in my previous post! I said the opposite. I said that there has to have been many 'person(s)' on this earth prior to the creation of the nappy headed man and woman. That is what I said. 

And, BTW, the term 'EDEN' means 'EARTH'!!! Where in the earth was this particular 'GARDEN'? That is what you are not understanding due

to the accepted interpretation of the slaveyard teachings. This particular 'Guarded Den' [ie GARDEN] in Eden is based on 4 main rivers, so says ancient scripture! So yeah, the Adamah lived in 'a place called --THE EARTH--'. Troy, although I don't believe that this is at all intentional, but because of the way that you have been conditioned to think, you are changing my words around based on your preconceived beliefs. I absolutely do NOT believe that the Adamah people were the FIRST humans on this earth.

 

But scientist due say that all males with the YDNA haplogroups, stem from ONE ORIGIN!!!--OUT OF AFRICA!!! 

And, although they lie about the dates and use vague unproven units like BP 'Before Present' based on 1950,

they use the unit 'A' to represent the name of 'ADAM' for all of the BASAL markings that are on ALL NORMAL YDNA HAPLOGROUPS.

 

 

9 hours ago, Troy said:

 

On 4/7/2020 at 10:33 AM, Pioneer1 said:

Neanderthals were a result of Caucasians who degenerated into a more savage state after they were driven into the mountains.

 

@Pioneer1. Did you just make this up? You know, this has no basis in reality right?

 

 

 

LOL

 

 

On 4/7/2020 at 10:33 AM, Pioneer1 said:

You should know that humans didn't come from neanderthals, but rather it was the other way around.

 

@Pioneer1 Yes, I absolutely agree. 

On 4/7/2020 at 10:33 AM, Pioneer1 said:

If you doubt this, study the royalty of many European dynasties and how deformed and "weird" a lot of them were because of the custom of marrying and mating with close relatives in an effort to keep the wealth inside the family.

 

Yes, although I don't understand all of what you say here, I absolutely agree in that the incest did bring about the recessive 'archaic' DNA! 

And also, that kind of incest did lead to a lot of problems, still present today! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Question:

Do blue eyes come from Neanderthals?

Answer:

Blue eyes do not come from Neanderthals, and current data shows that Neanderthals had a variety of skin tones and had different eye colors (including brown). Two female Neanderthals from Croatia were studied and their genome demonstrated a likelihood that they had tawny skin, brown eyes, and brunette hair.

https://owlcation.com/stem/8-Neanderthal-Traits-in-Modern-Humans

 

 

Is haplogroup Y-DNA BT hypothetical?

Grant Lee, BA Honours, History, University of Western Australia (2009)

Updated Oct 14 2019 –

 

...However, genetic researchers have been searching for BT* for more than 15 years now,

and the chances of finding it decrease every day. …

https://www.quora.com/Is-haplogroup-Y-DNA-BT-hypothetical

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Chevdove said:

Troy, although I don't believe that this is at all intentional, but because of the way that you have been conditioned to think, you are changing my words around based on your preconceived beliefs.

 

I'm not trying to change you words around.  When restating my understanding of your position I use words like "apparently" because I'm not sure, but making assumptions based upon your statements.

 

Besides, I'm not making statements based upon my preconceived beliefs.  I'm making statements based upon my understanding of the available science. I have no personal way of knowing that Neanderthals even existed -- let alone have become extinct.

 

All I'm saying is that when you declare that Neanderthals are not extinct rejects all the scientific data we have available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Troy

Did you just make this up? You know, this has no basis in reality right?


Pretty much, as I've read no other material stating this in it's entirety.
I reached that conclusion due to deductive reasoning based on multiple sources of information.

Are you familiar with the term "Slavic" or the Slavic (Eastern European) branch of the Caucasian race?




Chev


And, BTW, the term 'EDEN' means 'EARTH'!!!


Actually the English word "Eden" is a mistranslation of the Middle Eastern "Aden".
Aden is a city and gulf on the southern tip of Yemen where it connects to Africa (Somalia to be exact).


Yemen Bans Entry into its Territorial Waters


The GARDEN of Eden (Garden of Adan) was in Africa.
Most likely when those two land masses were closer together and connected.

 


 

Yes, although I don't understand all of what you say here, I absolutely agree in that the incest did bring about the recessive 'archaic' DNA!

And also, that kind of incest did lead to a lot of problems, still present today!


Yes, many of the cases of deformities and mental retardation you see today come about as a result of incest because the genes are too close together.
Fathers having sex with their own daughters and brothers with their own sisters.
And not only do the women refuse to abort the fetuses but many of them refuse to even  report their fathers or brothers to the authorities!

That sickness is a remnant from the cave-man days of the Caucasus when it.....like bestiality (sex with animals)....was practiced heavily before Moses and his men went up to the mountains to stamp it out and civilize the savages.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pioneer 

3 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

I reached that conclusion due to deductive reasoning based on multiple sources of information.

 

OK. Why bother conjuring fictional stories that run counter to something that has alresdy been proven?

 

3 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

Are you familiar with the term "Slavic" or the Slavic (Eastern European) branch of the Caucasian race?

 

Dude there no basis in objective reality for a so called, "Eastern European branch of the Caucasian race." This is dervied fromracist junk science and is perhaps why you like using Puerto Rican to describe the way some looks.

 

Yes, I'm familiar with the term slavic.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/9/2020 at 6:08 PM, Troy said:

my understanding of the available science. I have no personal way of knowing that Neanderthals even existed -- let alone have become extinct.

 

@Troy That is why I posted references about the percentage reported by scientist. I am using AVAILABLE SCIENCE. I understand why you or anyone would doubt even the existence of Neanderthals but, that is the purpose of government(s) and their responsibility on education and their acknowledgment. Truth is not based on us as individuals but eventually and historically, government are contrasted with other governments on issues of truth and confirmed data. Therefore, this government reports info about Neanderthals and other archaic beings based on skeletal remains and DNA analysis, so yes, they did exist based on 'national concensus'. These archaic beings do not match the modern human species at all. 

 

Therefore, scientist are reporting facts about modern DNA, archaic DNA and that yes, there was a contemporary period in which different species did

interbreed and we show this today. 

On 4/9/2020 at 6:08 PM, Troy said:

when you declare that Neanderthals are not extinct rejects all the scientific data we have available.

 

The scientific data available today says that modern humans are continuing to reproduce and have about 2-20% Neanderthal DNA, and I am basing my beliefs on this SCIENTIFC DATA that has been reported and also more (of which I have not presented) regarding ancient scripture.  Now, how am I rejecting scientific data. My interpretation is based on reported scientific data and I believe that the scientist reporting these statements are in contradiction when they do not admit that it can't be possible for Neanderthals to be extinct if we modern humans are still expressing their traits after thousands of years.

 

Well anyway, I also believe that soon you will hear scientist reporing just what I am saying, and that is why I also want to make these statements. I feel that it is important for us as African Americans to address some of these issues that our government is reporting or 'half-reporting' about our past because it has to do with them also exploiting us too. If our 'Black' leaders in the government agree to miseducation then it shows that we are in agreement.

 

Neanderthals cannot be extinct if scientist report that modern humans are still showing these traits through reproduction.

Now, I provided some terminology such as POPULATION GENETICS, the definition of SPECIES, etc. to support why I say this. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

Actually the English word "Eden" is a mistranslation of the Middle Eastern "Aden".
Aden is a city and gulf on the southern tip of Yemen where it connects to Africa (Somalia to be exact).

 

@Pioneer1 It could be the opposite, in that 'Aden' is a mistranslation of the word 'Eden'. But at any rate, I LIKE WHAT YOU WROTE!

No, I don't believe that word 'Eden' is a mistranslation but 'AEDEN' is a cognate term for 'EARTH' and the word is broad and needs 

to be considered within context.  I believe that both terms 'Aden' and 'Eden' does define, not only that region of 'the gulf of Aden'

but at one point, it included the whole area of 'the Garden of Eden' [ie Guarded Den of Eden], but the actualy area of the specific

Garden of Eden is based on THE MOTHER RIVER, the oldest river at its' source. This ancient river source and the other three rivers that flow 

from a source marks this CENTRAL POINT of AEden. Also, I can see the cognate term because of what you wrote! 

In that region of the gulf of Aden, historians do report an ancient civilization and archeologist have reported many remains! 

 

14 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

 


Are you familiar with the term "Slavic" or the Slavic (Eastern European) branch of the Caucasian race?

 

 

Absolutely not!--But then, that is part of our deliberate miseducation!

For thousands of years, many White Europeans have been through what is known as SLAVICIZATION and we are made to believe

that they want to look like what White East Europeans and Russian look like today, OH, BUT THIS IS NOT SO!!!

 

This ancient term 'SLAVIC' can be compared to today, such as like Kim Kardashian's children--and if they later become adults and interbreed with

other White Europeans--and then become defined as African AMericans!  The term 'African American' in the future would eventually transition to

very light skinned African Americans and then White people embracing our history and then making it a national classification. We, the Original 

African AMericans may be 'erased' and then the term African American would never have been known to define a Slave inheritance based on 

BLACK AFRICAN ORIGINS. And, another way to understand the lie about the term 'SLAVS' would be to see us, African American DOS in that 

many ORiginal people of the African continent regard us as being WATERED DOWN through interbreeding, and although many of us still 

have the dominant traits of being from the Mother land, however, we may not be regarded as being 'Original' by other governments. 

THIS IS THE TRANSITION OF THE TERM 'Slav'.

 

The term 'SLAV' comes from the term 'SLOVENE'--SLOV-VENETIAN--SLOV-PHOENICIAN--BLACK AFRICAN-TYPED PEOPLE initially enslaved byway of the

Roman civilization right there in VENETIAN-ITALY [PHOENICIAN-ITALY]. Both terms 'Slov' and 'Venetian' carry a huge amount of suppressed history.

 

14 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

Yes, many of the cases of deformities and mental retardation you see today come about as a result of incest because the genes are too close together.
Fathers having sex with their own daughters and brothers with their own sisters.

 

I agree with part of this, oh yes. 

14 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

And not only do the women refuse to abort the fetuses but many of them refuse to even  report their fathers or brothers to the authorities!

 

Wow, I never realize this! 

 

14 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

before Moses and his men went up to the mountains to stamp it out and civilize the savages.
 

 

Okay, this makes no sense, again, because the dates of Moses are completely wrong based on what you are saying.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Troy


OK. Why bother conjuring fictional stories that run counter to something that has alresdy been proven


I didn't know the origin of Neanderthals was "proven" or even COULD be "proven" without a time machine.
I thought according to Western science their origin was only THEORIZED based on the archeological evidence they found.

You yourself admit you have no way of KNOWING that they even existed, and you're right.
Neither you nor I KNOW for sure their existence or origin, so how can you suggest it has been proven?





Dude there no basis in objective reality for a so called, "Eastern European branch of the Caucasian race." This is dervied fromracist junk science and is perhaps why you like using Puerto Rican to describe the way some looks.

Yes, I'm familiar with the term slavic


Damn that's a long ass "yes"....lol.

Ok, since you are familiar with the term Slavic and the Slavs, those people are the ones that Western archeologists call "neanderthals" devolved from.

 

 

 

 

Chev

Neanderthals cannot be extinct if scientist report that modern humans are still showing these traits through reproduction.


And they're not!
Just take a look at these people of Slavic origin and tell me what they look like to you.

Meet 5 of the most feared Russian MMA fighters - Russia Beyond Mairbek Taisumov - Wikipedia

 

 


Also, you're correct that the English word "slave" is rooted in the European term "Slav" or "Slavic" but this is because the Slavic Caucasians were the original slaves.
The Arabs would come up through Turkey and enslave them and bring them back to their various empires and that's where the term "slave" came from.

 


Okay, this makes no sense, again, because the dates of Moses are completely wrong based on what you are saying


Probably because those dates you're looking at is based on the "Mythological Moses" of the Bible and not the historical Musa (and his crew) who were sent up from Kemet to the savages and show them the light of civilization.

Matter of fact......
Musa (Moses) had such a hard time trying to civilize those cave dwelling minions that sometimes he had to sleep in a ring of fire at night for protection to keep them off!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/11/2020 at 6:45 PM, Pioneer1 said:

And they're not!

 

@Pioneer1 Thank you!!!

OMG! Thank you. 

 

And, yes, the photos that you posted absolutely shows certain 'archaic' Neanderthal traits!!!--But I would never say that anyone can be Neanderthal completely because we are all so very intemixed. 

 

On 4/11/2020 at 6:45 PM, Pioneer1 said:

the Slavic Caucasians were the original slaves.

 

No. Here you are completely disregarding BLACK ENSLAVEMENT by the Romans. This type of belief that you have that SLAVS are White Slaves in a world that was dominantly Black AFrican makes no sense at all. You have completely thrown down Black African people. The Romans campaigned heavily all throughout Africa to get their slaves.

 

Also, you are completely butchering history. For HOW LONG did the GRECO-ROMANS WAR!!!!!?

Don't you realize those Negroes caught up in these PUNIC WARS!?

These dates and times show a dominant Negro presence as the Greeks went all down into Africa.

Alexander-the-Great became the pharaoh of Egypt. He was all in Africa. The SLAVS were NOT White Slaves.

 

 

On 4/11/2020 at 6:45 PM, Pioneer1 said:

the "Mythological Moses" of the Bible and not the historical Musa (and his crew) who were sent up from Kemet

 

LOL. You are making up stuff. 

Both are of the exact same time period. 

You 'historical Musa' of Kemet is dated to be the very same time period as KEMET records are extremely detailed.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/11/2020 at 6:45 PM, Pioneer1 said:

Neither you nor I KNOW for sure their existence or origin, so how can you suggest it has been proven?

 

Because they have dug up fossils and mapped the Neanderthal DNA.

 

On 4/11/2020 at 6:45 PM, Pioneer1 said:

Ok, since you are familiar with the term Slavic and the Slavs, those people are the ones that Western archeologists call "neanderthals" devolved from.

 

Again this is factually false.  Saying it multiple times will not make it true.  Perhaps sharing something from a source, other than your imagination, might be beneficial.

 

On 4/11/2020 at 6:45 PM, Pioneer1 said:

Just take a look at these people of Slavic origin and tell me what they look like to you.

 

Again, your observations are not a DNA test  Besides these guy are not Neanderthals.  I suspect you would not dare say it to their faces 😉

 

3 hours ago, Chevdove said:

And, yes, the photos that you posted absolutely shows certain 'archaic' Neanderthal traits!!!

 

NO!!!!! 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chev

And, yes, the photos that you posted absolutely shows certain 'archaic' Neanderthal traits!!!--But I would never say that anyone can be Neanderthal completely because we are all so very intemixed.


I understand what you're saying, but Neanderthal isn't actually a species.
It's simply the modern scientific label for a group of malformed Caucasians.

I know science CALLS them a species, but they are just a group of Caucasians who had so degenerated from living a savage life and breeding among eachother in that condition that it became part of their genetics.


 

You 'historical Musa' of Kemet is dated to be the very same time period as KEMET records are extremely detailed


Oh, so you believe and agree that they are both talking of the same individual?
 




Troy


Because they have dug up fossils and mapped the Neanderthal DNA.


That's not proof, that's evidence.
Not that I disagree with the premise....just pointing out the difference.



Again, your observations are not a DNA test Besides these guy are not Neanderthals. I suspect you would not dare say it to their faces


I would if I was packing that heat....lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

I would if I was packing that heat....lol.

 

You better be, cause those Neanderthals ... I mean guys are would rip you to shreds. 🙂

 

Seriously, if you believe Neanderthals decended from so called "white" homo sapiens then we can't have an intelligent conversation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/13/2020 at 1:37 PM, Troy said:
On 4/13/2020 at 9:54 AM, Chevdove said:

And, yes, the photos that you posted absolutely shows certain 'archaic' Neanderthal traits!!!

 

NO!!!!! 

 

@Troy Why do you say no!?

Okay, I will provide a reference or two. 

 

20 physical traits you may have inherited from a Neanderthal

By John Worthington for Ancestry – Genealogy & DNA

 ...4.   Supraorbital ridge or brow ridge

 

4-Brow-ridge.jpg

 

 

5.   Broad, projecting nose...

5-Broad-projecting-nose.jpg

 

 

8.   Wide fingers and thumbs...

8b-Wide-fingers-and-thumbs.jpg

 

 

11.   Fair skin and freckles... 

11-Fair-skin-and-freckles-e1419461791990

 

 

13.   Large eyes ...

13-Large-eyes-e1419462261912.jpg

 

The large eye sockets in Neanderthal skulls indicate that they had large eyeballs to fill them.  Antroplogists have suggested that they required larger eyes to enable them to see in the weaker sunlight of the northern latitudes.

https://www.abroadintheyard.com/20-physical-traits-inherited-from-neanderthal/

 

Neanderthal in our skin

Most Neanderthal variants exist in only around 2 percent of modern people of Eurasian descent.... The regions that contained high frequencies of Neanderthal sequences included genes that could yield clues to their functional effect. Base-pair differences between Neanderthal and human variants rarely fall in protein-coding sequences, but rather in regulatory ones, suggesting the archaic sequences affect gene expression. …

https://www.the-scientist.com/features/neanderthal-dna-in-modern-human-genomes-is-not-silent-66299

 

@Troy You have never heard of this kind of data from a scientific source? 

 

On 4/13/2020 at 3:47 PM, Pioneer1 said:

It's simply the modern scientific label for a group of malformed Caucasians.

I know science CALLS them a species, but they are just a group of Caucasians who had so degenerated from living a savage life and breeding among eachother in that condition that it became part of their genetics.

 

But, @Pioneer1 We are ALL intermixed with Caucasians!!! So that makes us defined as the same!!! 

 

 

On 4/13/2020 at 3:47 PM, Pioneer1 said:

Oh, so you believe and agree that they are both talking of the same individual?

 

The date KEMET/Egypt marks Moses is detailed. The term 'MUSA' is recorded in both Sumerian text and Egyptian text. 

This term is used many times and at no time is it applied to your version of Caucasians being stuck behind a wall,

where Kemet sent any MUSA up to the Caucasus to teach them and give them ARYAN CAUCASIAN SCRIPT!? Duh! Pioneer! Lol. 

21 hours ago, Troy said:

Seriously, if you believe Neanderthals decended from so called "white" homo sapiens then we can't have an intelligent conversation.

 

Wow. Okay. I'm scratching my head on this one too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, because no one can merely look at someone and determine which traits came fron Neanderthal DNA. This should be obvious.

 

11 hours ago, Chevdove said:

Troy You have never heard of this kind of data from a scientific source? 

 

First, John Worthington for Ancestry – Genealogy & DNA is not a scientific source. Tell me about his "scientific" background please. Second, the article is click bait, designed to get your attention not to enlighten you.

 

You might have noticed the word "may" in the article's title. May implies possibility not not certainty. 

 

I don't think you read the entire artcle from the-scientist.com which 

 

"...researchers cannot yet say how these archaic sequences affect people today, much less the humans who acquired them some 50,000–55,000 years ago."

 

It then spends the rest of the article explaining why. It decredits what you and Pioneerbare saying. I suggest you read it carefully.

 

Neanderthals are extinct and white people did not descend from them. Accept the known science.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Troy said:

First, John Worthington for Ancestry – Genealogy & DNA is not a scientific source.

 

@Troy My question to you was not based on 'just' this reference source, rather I asked you if you had not heard of 'this kind of data from any scientific source'. I posted a quick google search reference of 'John Worthington for Ancestry - Genealogy & DNA' because it is a source that has been published for years and seems to me to be a very good source. So, I regard it as a good 'secondary scientific source' at least. As far as it being a 'click-bait', I don't understand what you mean because the content seems to be a good source, imo. 

 

9 hours ago, Troy said:

no one can merely look at someone and determine which traits came fron Neanderthal DNA. This should be obvious.

 

I totally disagree. I based this on years of research as I do have a degree in Biology and I do understand the Scientific Method, of which one vital aspect is 

OBSERVATION. Not only have scientist published information on this subject and data but it definitely agrees with observation. You are wrong, Troy.

 

9 hours ago, Troy said:

Tell me about his "scientific" background please.

 

Okay, below, I will post some more "scientific" background from other reference sources that report the same findings as the sources I posted previously.

 

9 hours ago, Troy said:

Second, the article is click bait, designed to get your attention not to enlighten you.

You might have noticed the word "may" in the article's title. May implies possibility not not certainty. 

 

Uh uh. This makes no sense to me, how is this article not enlightening if it shows detail examples of what scientist have been presenting for recent years? Some of the picture references are of celebrities of which I do not believe would disagree. So why are you so adamant about denying what has been published? and yes, I agree about the words "May" and "mostly" and "almost" ... used in this study as I did say in other post. The model with the large eyes is well known, the man with the large hands is also well known and etc. 

 

9 hours ago, Troy said:

I don't think you read the entire artcle from the-scientist.com which 

 

I absolutely did! 

 

9 hours ago, Troy said:

I don't think you read the entire artcle from the-scientist.com which 

 

"...researchers cannot yet say how these archaic sequences affect people today, much less the humans who acquired them some 50,000–55,000 years ago."

 

Again, this is my area of study and I can see that are not understanding what is being reported here! Just because researchers cannot not yet say how theyse archaic sequence affect people today, DOES NOT MEAN THAT THEY ARE NOT ACCEPTING THAT THESE TRAITS ARE INDEED ARCHAIC!!!--and that modern humans have these archaic traits, --acquired them through reproduction from interbreeding with Neanderthals!!! The simply do not know the whole complete story, that's all that they are saying here. 

 

9 hours ago, Troy said:

It then spends the rest of the article explaining why. It decredits what you and Pioneerbare saying. I suggest you read it carefully.

 

I did!!! And, I don't know what you mean here about discrediting what I am saying. I am saying that if we today, express these archaic genes then, the scientist are not reporting a complete finding of what they already know. 

 

9 hours ago, Troy said:

Neanderthals are extinct

 

I dont think so.

 

9 hours ago, Troy said:

white people did not descend from them.

 

I agree. I absolutely do NOT believe that White people descend from them. I have said this repeatedly.

But I do believe that we, all modern humans have some kind of blending and/or hybridization--all of us whether we are White Europeans 

or Brown African-typed modern humans.

 

9 hours ago, Troy said:

Accept the known science.

 

Why should I not have an opinion? Because you accept it? You yourself said that scientist update and make changes, so why should I be allowed to form an opinion on what they have reported today?

 

Okay here are some more references and I don't know what you consider a valid "scientific source" but I did post initially that these findings stem from an INTERNATIONAL STUDY of scientist and Stanford University was part of that group. So, therefore some of my source, I believe are scientiic sources such as the NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC organization and some may be secondary sources but they all seem to reputable:

 

 

NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC 

Why Am I Neanderthal?

  

When our ancestors first migrated out of Africa around 70,000 years ago, they were not alone.

 

 At that time, at least two other species of hominid cousins walked the Eurasian landmass—Neanderthals and Denisovans. 

 

As our modern human ancestors migrated through Eurasia, they encountered the Neanderthals and interbred. Because of this, a small amount of Neanderthal DNA was introduced into the modern human gene pool.

https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/neanderthal/

 

Everyone living outside of Africa today has a small amount of Neanderthal in them, carried as a living relic of these ancient encounters. A team of scientists comparing the full genomes of the two species concluded that most Europeans and Asians have approximately 2 percent Neanderthal DNA. Indigenous sub-Saharan Africans have none, or very little Neanderthal DNA because their ancestors did not migrate through Eurasia.

https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/neanderthal/

 

"Everyone living outside of Africa today"

This is my case in point. This does NOT mean that NO African person

does NOT have these traits. Many African-typed people live outside of Africa.

_________________________________________________________________________________________ 

 

Okay, here is another "scientific reference"

 

Most people are part-Neanderthal.

That may be a protection against viruses

 

Science and technology

Hybrid vigor

 

 Oct 8, 2018


MOST modern human beings have Neanderthal genes lurking in their DNA.

That is well known. Only Africans, or those of recent African ancestry, are exempt.

 

Genetic analysis makes it clear that there were at least two periods when Homo sapiens

and Homo neanderthalensis (a species found only in Europe and Asia) interbred with one another: ...

https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2018/10/04/most-people-are-part-neanderthal-that-may-be-a-protection-against-viruses

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, Here is another reference source on NEANDERTHAL ANATOMY from Wikipedia:

This post agree with my firstreference source from Ancestry Genealogy

 

Distinguishing physical traits

The large number of classic Neanderthal traits is significant because some examples of paleolithic and even modern Homo sapiens may sometimes show one or even a few of these traits, but not most or all of them at the same time.

 

·         Cranial

o    Sloping forehead …

o    Supraorbital ridge, a prominent, trabecular (spongy) brow ridge…

o    Broad nose

o    Bony projections on the sides of the nasal opening, projecting nose

 

Sub-cranial …

·         Large hands and feet

·         Larger round finger tips…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal_anatomy

 

 

Okay, and Here is Another Reference source,

maybe secondary source but based on "scientific published works":

This source mentions the Neanderthal trait of FRECKLES of which I presented in my

first reference source from Ancestry Genealogy;

 

 

Science – NBCNEWS.com

Some Neanderthals were redheads

Bones yield genetic data that adds a red hair, light skin and maybe freckles

By Jeanna Bryner

Live Science

Uploaded 10/25/07 3:02:53 PM ET

 

Bones from two Neanderthals yielded valuable genetic information that adds red hair, light skin and perhaps some freckling to our extinct relatives. The results, detailed online today by the journal Science, suggest that at least 1 percent of Neanderthals were redheads….

 http://www.nbcnews.com/id/21474978/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/some-neanderthals-were-redheads/#.Xpd2qP1KjIU

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi @Chevdove writing text like this does not make your points any stronger 🙂

 

Wikipedia is not a primary source of information. If there is a point you like to make, or evidence you'd like to share, please direct me to the source Wikipedia cites; otherwise I'd have to track down the source.  Besides I'm not going to hunt down sources that says Neanderthalss were still walking around in 2020.

 

Chevdoe, I'm afraid you are misinterpreting everything you are reading on this subject.  For example you shared the following:

 

18 hours ago, Chevdove said:

Some Neanderthals were redheads

Bones yield genetic data that adds a red hair, light skin and maybe freckles

By Jeanna Bryner

Live Science

Uploaded 10/25/07 3:02:53 PM ET

 

Bones from two Neanderthals yielded valuable genetic information that adds red hair, light skin and perhaps some freckling to our extinct relatives. The results, detailed online today by the journal Science, suggest that at least 1 percent of Neanderthals were

 

What point are you trying to make here?  How does this prove Neanderthals live among us today?

 

Seriously, maybe the reason you do not believe Neanderthals are extinct is because you do not know what extinct means.  That may come across as condescending, but I can not think of any other reason for you to continue to hold the belief that Neanderthals are still alive.

 

People who have light skin, read hair, and large brows are not Neanderthals, they are homo sapiens like everyone else alive today.

 

18 hours ago, Chevdove said:

 

On 4/15/2020 at 8:54 AM, Troy said:

no one can merely look at someone and determine which traits came fron Neanderthal DNA. This should be obvious.

 

I totally disagree. I based this on years of research as I do have a degree in Biology and I do understand the Scientific Method, of which one vital aspect is 

OBSERVATION. Not only have scientist published information on this subject and data but it definitely agrees with observation. You are wrong, Troy.

 

So you can run a DNA test one someone by merely looking at them Chevdove?  You can look at someone and determine that they have Nethanderthal DNA? That is a remarkable skill unfortunately it is not one you possess because it is impossible.  Sure science involves obervation, but you can not observe someone DNA with your naked eye.  

 

Perhaps this is why so some many people struggle with the belief that there is only one race.  People like to say it is obvious, because we look so different. Of course the science disagree with multiple human races, because one's observations are based upon what one can see, which rarely -- if ever --  tells the whole story.

 

The most fascinating subjects in science to me is quantum theory -- it defies everything we know about the world based upon what we can see or sense on any level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Troy said:

does not make your points any stronger 🙂

 

Wikipedia is not a primary source of information.

 

 

 Hey @Troy I agree, however, I presented three other sources, one of which was National Geographic.

 

19 hours ago, Troy said:

Besides I'm not going to hunt down sources that says Neanderthalss were still walking around in 2020.

 

And, again, I already address this point completely, and that is my very position in which I did say that as of now, you won't find that statement in 2020 from scientist right now. My position as repeatedly been that based on what they have indeed reported, I believe that they will NOT report or admit their complete findings. The title of the other references that I did report such as "Why Am I Neanderthal" and "Most people are part-Neanderthal" and "Hybrid vigor"  supports my argument very much so!

 

19 hours ago, Troy said:

What point are you trying to make here?  How does this prove Neanderthals live among us today?

 

My previous statement addresses the point that I am trying to make here. As I also stated, these traits that are still being reproduced today after thousands of years supports my argument in that scientist are NOT telling us the whole truth. I mention the study of Population Genetics, the definition of Species previously to support my argument. 

 

19 hours ago, Troy said:

because you do not know what extinct means.  That may come across as condescending, but I can not think of any other reason for you to continue to hold the belief that Neanderthals are still alive.

 

Troy! Like I said, I just wanted to address this topic because of my area of study and so, as you said earlier about Pioneer, it's not that I have not explained myself but perhaps you are not willing to respect that a person like me could be valid, so I just want to make sure that I have the opportunity to say this first because I believe that one day scientist will make this very claim and then perhaps you will accept it. For you to believe that I do NOT know what "extinct" means after I provided an argument based on me telling you that I do have a degree in Biology and understand the Scientific Method and have applied this principle means that you are disregarding me no matter what I present. But, no, I am not offended and am very happy that you gave me this audience. For that I say, thank you very much!

 

19 hours ago, Troy said:

People who have light skin, read hair, and large brows are not Neanderthals, they are homo sapiens like everyone else alive today.

 

I never implied, ever!--that people with these traits are Neanderthal, that has never been my point. You may be jumping to your own conclusions. But no, people that show certain traits does not necessarily means that they are homo sapiens either based on my argument because I believe certain phenotypes may show a degree of "blending" or "hybridization" that we homo sapiens exhibit but also with regards to "hybridization" that means that scientist today are NOT telling us the whole truth. The presence of "Hybridization" suggest that their is still another "species" present in some type of population--somewhere existing amongst us in this earth, imo. 

 

19 hours ago, Troy said:

So you can run a DNA test one someone by merely looking at them Chevdove? 

 

No, that's crazy. 

 

19 hours ago, Troy said:

You can look at someone and determine that they have Nethanderthal DNA?

 

Oh absolutely!!!

Troy, when you hear news reports about "suspects" and they are described as having "Nappy Hair' then this Phenotypical trait absolutely means that if you ran a DNA test, they will 100% show that they have "African traits"!!!

Modern Humans are NOT the origin of certain traits that Neanderthals posses at all. The origin of the "thick brow ridge" is purely a Neanderthal trait and not all of us Modern humans have this trait. Just like the trait of expressing nappy hair, YOU WILL NEVER SEE A WHITE EUROPEAN WITH THIS TRAIT of Nappy hair!!! Never.

You will see all of us humans showing a degree of a BLENDED TRAIT such as curly hair or wavy hair, but only indigenous African-typed people can express the AFRO!!! 

 

19 hours ago, Troy said:

That is a remarkable skill unfortunately it is not one you possess because it is impossible.  Sure science involves obervation, but you can not observe someone DNA with your naked eye.  

 

Oh yes you can!!!

If you observe someone that is SEVERELY MENTALLY RETARDED then you can be sure that their DNA will comfirm this type of observation!!! 

 

19 hours ago, Troy said:

because one's observations are based upon what one can see, which rarely -- if ever --  tells the whole story.

 

Now that is the truth! You can never determine the whole story based on phenotype! I agree. As one science report stated, today we humans only exhibit part of Neanderthal traits, never the whole. 

 

Again, I appreciate you giving me the opportunity to express my opinions. 

  

And BTW, I am African-typed and I express nappy hair, but Hey!--I love my freckles! And I don't see anything negative about them at all. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Chevdove said:

I believe that they will NOT report or admit their complete findings.

 

Why?

 

8 hours ago, Chevdove said:

...it's not that I have not explained myself but perhaps you are not willing to respect that a person like me could be valid...

 

Yes, I do have difficulty in believing the opinions of people who reject, or cherry pick, science. Sure science makes mistakes, but somethings are not really up for debate. The world is not flat, there is only one race of humans, and Neanderthals have been extinct for thusands of years.

 

If you told me the brontosaurus was not extinct, based on the illfounded belief that scientists were failing to admitting the truth; i word view you the same way.

 

8 hours ago, Chevdove said:

"Nappy Hair' then this Phenotypical trait absolutely means that if you ran a DNA test, they will 100% show that they have "African traits"!!!

 

I don't know this to be true. Some african people don't have bappy hair and some non african people do. Do you know which gene(s) contribute to what you call nappy hair. Are there environmental factord that causes this gene to be expressed? Supposed the person is bald, can you look at them, read their dna sequence, and tell me what the tecture of their hair is?

 

8 hours ago, Chevdove said:

YOU WILL NEVER SEE A WHITE EUROPEAN WITH THIS TRAIT of Nappy hair!!! Never.

 

Just a couple nappy headed white boys for your review.

 

bob-ross-9464216-1-402.jpgAG_AlbumL.jpg

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Troy said:

ust a couple nappy headed white boys for your review.

 

Oh my gosh! @Troy The two picture references clearly show these White/European 'boys' men that you posted do NOT have nappy hair!

Plus, I have already researched the first one you listed and he confirmed that he has PERMED his hair!!!

He is a well known artist many times featured on the PBS channels. And likewise the second pic you posted shows curly hair.

 

bob-ross-9464216-1-402.jpg

 

Again, this famous artist featured on PBS channels admits that he chemically PERMS his hair!!!

 

Nappy hair--bushy hair--kinky hair-- frizzly hair... is exclusively the DNA of ORIGINAL AFRICAN PEOPLE. And I repeat, YOU 

WILL NEVER FIND A WHITE EUROPEAN WITH NAPPY HAIR!!! LOL.

 

21 hours ago, Troy said:

Do you know which gene(s) contribute to what you call nappy hair.

 

I know that the Basal A Y base haplogroup would be the DNA MARKER for this Nappy hair and because genes tend to travel in pairs and 

it linked to melanin, this NAPPY HAIR GENE will only remain with the Original African people.

21 hours ago, Troy said:

Are there environmental factord that causes this gene to be expressed?

 

No. Absolutely not.

 

21 hours ago, Troy said:

Supposed the person is bald, can you look at them, read their dna sequence, and tell me what the tecture of their hair is?

 

Not always but because genes tend to travel in pairs, it would be pretty easy to see a Black African-typed man like youself and pretty much know that you had either nappy hair or a COMBINATION HAIR TYPE, meaning a mixture of bushy type and/or curly type hair!!! And, a European/White man who is bald would never have had nappy hair at all! Black AFrican American men who show patterns of baldness are dominant in East Africa for a significant reason and I hope to share my research on that one day. These type of Black men also tend to have daughters with a beautiful head of 'combination-type hair'. As I told you before, baldness is an incredible 'blessing' and again, I hope to share my research on that one day. 

 

21 hours ago, Troy said:
On 4/17/2020 at 8:04 AM, Chevdove said:

I believe that they will NOT report or admit their complete findings.

 

Why?

 

Because of White Supremacy which is more dominant than the well meaning Eurpean population! That's why. the minority European scholars are acting 'scared chicken' and are afraid to go against their government and print the truth about Neanderthal origins like they know that they should do. So, they spend a lot of wasted time getting together on an 'international level' and getting approval for what the big governmenst will allow to be publicized and what they won't allow to be publicized. That's why. It took them years before they even reported about their findings on Neanderthals for what they did allow. And when they did, they mixed in a lot of Bullsh*** about mtEve and a lot of other useless stuff. But it's their soul. It's hard for them all to admit that they come from 'ONE' origin and that of an African male!!! That is the origin of ALL MODERN MALEFACTORS today with the Straight Y-dna haplogroups. PERIOD. Neanderthal were intersexed and their Ydna has not been mapped but we know they were here, we know they reproduced with females.

 

21 hours ago, Troy said:

Yes, I do have difficulty in believing the opinions of people who reject, or cherry pick, science.

 

I dont believe that I cherry picked science. and, a lot of scientist 'reject' certain findings for specific reasons. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...