AZTEC GoDS

[whiskeyjack]

ill say this about the possibility of this whole fucking conundrum. The currents and the winds blow and flow in the direction of america from africa. Using a uniformitarianism approach, it is very much possible africans made it to the americas. I may need a little more convincing for the chinese boats landing in california, in my opinion they would have landed more often in british columbia. But the olmecs being african is 100% possible thinking in terms of uniformitarianism...

[~J~]

Here's a very good piece on Olmecs

Part 1


Part 2


Part 3

[Tre]

I actually appreciate your contribution to this thread J... however I think you do yourself a disservice when you dismiss all talk of black Olmecs from black people as a ‘black thing’ or Afrocentric??



When all is said and done the facts are still sitting there on the table staring you in the face.

"There is now undisputed scientific proof that the first Americans were descended from Africans or Australian aborigines, according to evidence in a new BBC documentary. Dozens of their skulls and cave writings have been found dating back to 50,000 years. The skulls, one named 'Lucia' by Scientists, have definite and distinct Negroid facial features like those of Africans, New Guineas or Australian Aborigines."
http://2012.caliwali.com/theolmecs.htm

We don’t have to watch videos of people giving their opinions about what the Olmecs looked like... we have actual facial reconstructions of the people that occupied key Olmec sites in Central and South America(from 1500 B.C. to about 300 A.D.) based on the oldest skeletons found in that region!





Quoted from Walter Neves in AAAS:

"A discussion of my long-term studies about the morphology of the first Americans includes comments from two North American colleagues to which I wish to respond.
Tom Dillehay, from the University of Kentucky, Lexington, says in the article that the results I obtained from Luzia (a member of the Olmecs of ancient Americas), which I suppose is the oldest human skeleton found in the Americas (dating from 11,000 to 11,500 million years ago), are "very preliminary," and that the archaeological evidence associated with the African-looking skull "is no different from what you see at sites with nonanomalous skeletons." And Leslie Freeman, from the University of Chicago, refers to "sparse skeletal evidence." Luzia, however, is just one of many South American Paleo-Indian skulls I have been investigating since the end of the 1980s. And all studies preceding and subsequent to the analysis of Luzia have generated the same result: The first South Americans have a marked morphological affinity with present-day Africans and Australians, showing no resemblance to present Asian Mongoloids or American Indians."

[Sentenza]

Wonderful post J! As you can see, the claims that the Olmecs were of African stock is just another attempt by Afrocentrists to create a positive for Africans, as they've accomplished next to nothing otherwise. They seem to be bringing up the Olmecs more and more often lately - no doubt due to the popularity of the Mayans in the mainstream - and are looking to misinform much like they've tried in the past with the ancient Egyptians.

To me personally the claim that the Olmecs were of african is utter nonsense. Its one of a couple of afrocentric myths that is totally twisting history and all the "proof" i have seen so far is ridiculous too. "The stone head has a flat nose too, looks a little african" is just not enough for me. And the idea to come up with pyramid shaped buildings is not that extraordinary, so several cultures might have (and have) come up with the same idea at the same time in different places of the world.
All the hard facts indicate that the Olmecs are not more african then i am. Thats my take on it.

However i dont think that there is a need to belittle africans, african history or to take away from what they have achieved. I know you believe in blacks being some lesser kind of species, so feel free to debate the issue with me here:

viewtopic.php?f=235&t=48319

[perongregory]

It's all jumbled and fucked up, What happens is blacks particularly blacks in the west have been fighting whites so long about our history, where this process has created some blacks who've take on the same method as the white eurocentrist and do a disservice to our relationship with other (non-white) people by trying to force a relationship with blacks and their history. Personally, I don't know too much about the Olmecs, and don't care. What I do care about is modern age and contemporary black history and our history in the old world, particularly in Africa and the Middle East. But I cant hate too much on so-called Afrocentrist when we have people like Azure9920.

[Sentenza]

It's all jumbled and #%@& up, What happens is blacks particularly blacks in the west have been fighting whites so long about our history, where this process has created some blacks who've take on the same method as the white eurocentrist and do a disservice to our relationship with other (non-white) people by trying to force a relationship with blacks and their history. Personally, I don't know too much about the Olmecs, and don't care. What I do care about is modern age and contemporary black history and our history in the old world, particularly in Africa and the Middle East. But I cant hate too much on so-called Afrocentrist when we have people like Azure9920.

Well said....I agree.

[Azure9920]

I know you believe in blacks being some lesser kind of species, so feel free to debate the issue with me here:

viewtopic.php?f=235&t=48319

I don't think they're any kind of lesser species, nor am I a racist like most of you think. If you were to erase the politically correct bias that you all have in place and look at history objectively, it has shown a distinct Negroid cultural deficit that no other racial group has come close to experiencing. You can sit there and make excuses, call me a racist or whatever you like, but the facts(real ones, not ones that come from people like Ivan Sertima) are on the table and in easy reach for anyone who is interested in the truth.

[Tre]

To me personally the claim that the Olmecs were of african is utter nonsense.

Sup Sentenza… what’s ridiculous is the belief that a people are somehow vegetables and that they remain planted in one place forever!

Its one of a couple of afrocentric myths that is totally twisting history and all the "proof" i have seen so far is ridiculous too. "The stone head has a flat nose too, looks a little african" is just not enough for me.

lol…you and Azure are two sides of the same coin! This is not far from Azures ridiculous assertion that whites academia’s like Leo Wiener, George Harlow, Basil Davidson, Andrzej Wiecinski, Matthew Sterling, Alexander Von Wuthenman and others who believe in an African Olmec origin are twisting history so that blacks can feel better about themselves. At the core you both preach the exact same philosophy of separation…… Azure wants to separate people along racial lines and you want blacks to stay in their place culturally!

And the idea to come up with pyramid shaped buildings is not that extraordinary, so several cultures might have (and have) come up with the same idea at the same time in different places of the world.

Please! Not just some random group is going to leave behind something so uniquely and distinctly African! Is this just coincidence, cause if so it’s a big one!


viewtopic.php?f=64&t=48314

[Sentenza]

To me personally the claim that the Olmecs were of african is utter nonsense.

Sup Sentenza… what’s ridiculous is the belief that a people are somehow vegetables and that they remain planted in one place forever!

Its one of a couple of afrocentric myths that is totally twisting history and all the "proof" i have seen so far is ridiculous too. "The stone head has a flat nose too, looks a little african" is just not enough for me.

lol…you and Azure are two sides of the same coin! This is not far from Azures ridiculous assertion that whites academia’s like Leo Wiener, George Harlow, Basil Davidson, Andrzej Wiecinski, Matthew Sterling, Alexander Von Wuthenman and others who believe in an African Olmec origin are twisting history so that blacks can feel better about themselves. At the core you both preach the exact same philosophy of separation…… Azure wants to separate people along racial lines and you want blacks to stay in their place culturally!

And the idea to come up with pyramid shaped buildings is not that extraordinary, so several cultures might have (and have) come up with the same idea at the same time in different places of the world.

Please! Not just some random group is going to leave behind something so uniquely and distinctly African! Is this just coincidence, cause if so it’s a big one!


viewtopic.php?f=64&t=48314

Ok gimme some time to read that other thread more closely, cause right now im off work and need to kick back, but this just quickly.
I dont want blacks to stay in their place culturally whatever that even means. Blacks have influenced and participated in many parts of the world, such as the middle east and southern europe, i just dont buy the Olmec theory. There are too many things that dont add up to me....Ill get to that later.

[Sentenza]

Sup Sentenza… what’s ridiculous is the belief that a people are somehow vegetables and that they remain planted in one place forever!

Whats up Tre..Im done now kicking back

Sure. But there are no signs of the Olmecs being of african origin other then a few similarities in their religious symbolism. By scientific standards that is extremely thin evidence and doesnt have to mean anything.

lol…you and Azure are two sides of the same coin! This is not far from Azures ridiculous assertion that whites academia’s like Leo Wiener, George Harlow, Basil Davidson, Andrzej Wiecinski, Matthew Sterling, Alexander Von Wuthenman and others who believe in an African Olmec origin are twisting history so that blacks can feel better about themselves. At the core you both preach the exact same philosophy of separation…… Azure wants to separate people along racial lines and you want blacks to stay in their place culturally!

I would say you are way over the top with that assertion you equal my doubt of the Olmec-African theory with racism, which is basically the same argument e.g. people use when criticizing Israel. You are labelled a Nazi almost automatically. Its an attempt to work around serious discussion and providing bullet proof evidence. Which hasnt been shown yet concerning the Olmecs. From what i have gathered is that there is little evidence for the Olmec-Africa connection. Im not saying its impossible since we have seen long distance sails like that in history, like the Vikings to Newfoundland or Pacific Islander settlement in Madagascar. The Ankh is somewhat odd, ill give you that, but it doesnt prove anything and is not enough to change my mind.
Coins with Ankhs on them have been coined in Minor Asia too, which is todays Turkey, so it doesnt necessarily prove anything.
And again, its not about blacks to stay "in their place", thats your mental cinema, because you suspect that i indirectly want to downtalk black culture. Which is not the case.


Please! Not just some random group is going to leave behind something so uniquely and distinctly African! Is this just coincidence, cause if so it’s a big one!

viewtopic.php?f=64&t=48314

I have tried to research some elaborations on the temple and specifically that Ankh, but i havent even found mentions of it, just one picture. Maybe i googled the wrong temple? Where is it at and what is it called. Under Mount Tlaloc i cant find anything.

[~J~]

Regarding the earlier post on the BBC documentary

[~J~]

The decedents of the Olmecs and their Native American cousins, compare their features to the colossal heads.

[Tre]

The root of the tree will always remain black no matter what else sprouts from it J. All the cultural reclassifications came later!

We know the term 'Indian' was coined in error when Columbus saw all the brown and black faces in the new world and thought he had landed in India (He had just left Africa's Gold Coast so he knew he wasn't in Africa anymore). If you go to India today, you’ll find in various regions that you cannot distinguish those people from Africans. You’ll see people darker and more physically African than any person in Sentenza's Sub-Saharan Africa (lol). There's a reason for this. India has always had an indigenous African= black population from the start.

So how do you even begin to search for indigenous 'Indian' skulls which were a fallacy from the start? That's why you keep digging up black folks (that's the real shit).

I've been blessed now to do a little traveling J, and each place I've been and seen other black people. I've been told by culturalist like Sentenza... those are not your people, those are dark skinned Brazilians, or black aboriginals, or just Indians with a dark sun tan. I guess they hear the same shit because on each visit we just look at each other in amazement, despite all the fallacious social constructs and imaginary borders to keep people separate. We recognize a part of ourselves in each other.

[perongregory]

I can attest to this to Tre, I and some of my family have been blessed to travel and what have we heard from the yemenite, the Egyptian, people in Central America...you are me. Numerous times I've heard this from so-called dark caucasians (lol) it seems only Europeans have a problem with this fact.

[Tre]

Sure. But there are no signs of the Olmecs being of african origin other then a few similarities in their religious symbolism....

Oh sure, it's all just one big coincidence Sentenza!
All you have to do is look at all the black gods being worshipped. Where did they come from??? Prime example is the war god Huitzilopochtli.



Not only is he black in color, but the snake in his hand links him culturally back to Africa. In the earliest form of organized religion known to man (Botswana) the snake was often seen as a sign of god and heaven. As Africans=blacks migrated to Central Asia, and subsequent migration to North and South America they took this concept with them. Interestingly enough, when those same African Serpent tribes were captured and sold into slavery, this same revered symbol was carried to Haiti by slaves from Ardra and Whydah, and then brought into Louisiana by Ewe speaking slaves.

"Any way you view it, Mexican civilization had its origin in Africa." -- Latin-American archaeologist J.A. Villacorta

"It is indisputable that in very ancient times the Negro race occupied our territory [Mexico]." -- Vicente Riva Palacio, historian born in Mexico City, 1837

I guess the obvious is not enough evidence for you. All you have to do is open your eye's man!

I would say you are way over the top with that assertion you equal my doubt of the Olmec-African theory with racism??

huh? You get on Azure about fragmenting people by race!. Next thing I know you're off and running with your thread viewtopic.php?f=235&t=48319 fragmenting black people by language and culture?? Two sides of the same coin man! Why can't we all take credit for each others achievements (that's the way it should be) even if the root of humanity is black it doesn't mean we cant ALL take credit for other branches (achievements) in it! One united people, not fragmented by language or culture!

...And again, its not about blacks to stay "in their place", thats your mental cinema, because you suspect that i indirectly want to downtalk black culture. Which is not the case.

I'll let you tell it Sentenza lol. I stopped reading your post viewtopic.php?f=235&t=48319 when I came across pejorative terms like "sub-Saharan Africa" which is a racist byword for "primitive." The term also suggest an imaginary line, or that a stretch of sand is a border that keeps black people and culture in place!
Culturalist can be just as bad as racist Sentenza .. it's a social construct that keeps everyone in their place by assigning a personality to their race (which you keep telling us you don't believe exist).

Coins with Ankhs on them have been coined in Minor Asia too, which is todays Turkey, so it doesnt necessarily prove anything.

...the ankh is a Kemetic (Egyptian) hieroglyphic that predates the coins found in ancient Cyprus and Asia Minor.

[Tre]

I have tried to research some elaborations on the temple and specifically that Ankh, but i havent even found mentions of it, just one picture. Maybe i googled the wrong temple? Where is it at and what is it called. Under Mount Tlaloc i cant find anything.

No problem man... the Temple Complex of the Rain God 'Tlaloc' is located at Calixtlahuacaust.... or just google 'Calixtlahuaca Archaeological Project'

[Azure9920]

There's a reason for this. India has always had an indigenous African= black population from the start.

Holy fuck, are you serious? You at least had a little bit of evidence(almost) that the Olmecs were African, but the Indians now? lol

If people like me didn't try to classify people into different groups then you'd have us all believing we're all black.

[perongregory]

What about the Dravidian population of the north, do some of these people not resemble east Africans in physical features sans hair texture. If you can accept a black indigenous population in the Phillipines, the Negritos, or better yet you can allow the caucasian race to occupy Europe, N. Africa, central Asia, the middle East and Asia, but you limit the very first people on earth who migrated to mutate into other "races" to one continent...That's preposterous.

[~J~]

Not only is he black in color, but the snake in his hand links him culturally back to Africa.

You do realize that's paint on his face, just look at the Ohlone Indians below.



By the way, the latest studies show that oldest temples in the Americas pre-date the Egyptian pyramids by at least a millennium.

Furthermore, I will concede to you that the most plausible research points to the first human migration coming out of East or South Africa, just as your West African ancestors migrated from (assuming you're African-American) However, there's no Pre Colombian African cultural influence, and according to neutral DNA studies or any other shows there's is no hint of Pre Colombian gene flow between Africa and the Americas.

[whiskeyjack]

the sun is bright in mexico and central america

[Azure9920]

What about the Dravidian population of the north, do some of these people not resemble east Africans in physical features sans hair texture. If you can accept a black indigenous population in the Phillipines, the Negritos, or better yet you can allow the caucasian race to occupy Europe, N. Africa, central Asia, the middle East and Asia, but you limit the very first people on earth who migrated to mutate into other "races" to one continent...That's preposterous.

Care to post a study that demonstrates Negroid gene flow outside of Africa?

according to neutral DNA studies or any other shows there's is no hint of Pre Colombian gene flow between Africa and the Americas.

Well said.

[Tre]

Y-DNA and mtDNA can be passed along your maternal (mother) or paternal (father) lines and become lost as a result of intermixing (which most likely was the case). Also consider there are 1024 ancestor slots in the 10th generation back for all the ancestors that contributed to your genetic makeup, with your mitochondrial DNA coming from one woman, and your Y chromosome coming from only one man. Test results will only represent two individuals out of 1024... in other words DNA can only provide a small look into our past.

You do realize that's paint on his face, just look at the Ohlone Indians.

Black war god Huitzilopochtli

You miss the point that Huitzilopochtli is considered a GOD to the Aztec people! So if you're suggesting that Huitzilopochtli is actually a Aztec painted BLACK to represent his GOD, I'm actually ok with that interpretation lol. The problem is... in the the Codex Borbonicus I've actually seen a pic of Paynal the messenger or impersonator of Huitzilopochtli. So that lets me know that the Aztecs understood the difference between an actual GOD and someone impersonating that god!


Paynal- The Messenger of Huitzilopochtli (also, known as the god impersonator)

[Azure9920]

lol, whatever.

[Sentenza]

Oh sure, it's all just one big coincidence Sentenza!
All you have to do is look at all the black gods being worshipped. Where did they come from??? Prime example is the war god Huitzilopochtli.

Not only is he black in color, but the snake in his hand links him culturally back to Africa. In the earliest form of organized religion known to man (Botswana) the snake was often seen as a sign of god and heaven. As Africans=blacks migrated to Central Asia, and subsequent migration to North and South America they took this concept with them. Interestingly enough, when those same African Serpent tribes were captured and sold into slavery, this same revered symbol was carried to Haiti by slaves from Ardra and Whydah, and then brought into Louisiana by Ewe speaking slaves.

It is no coincidence. Snakes existed in South America too and all the native religions reflected their zoological environment in their religious symbolism. People have had the same ideas and symbols all over the world without knowing of each other:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serpent_%2 ... traditions

The black god is black because:



around the equator all have pretty dark skin tones because of the UV rays. It doesnt mean that they are from Africa. Black skin is a trait that developes everywhere where there is a heavy sun intensity.
I had a friend from Paraguay, committed suicide in '05. He was native american and dark as the darkest coffee you can get.
African dark. But he was no african. Genetically amongst most people of black skin, there is no link.
As a matter of fact the Aboriginal people are the people on earth most distant from africans, which means a pale russian guy is closer related to a native african, then an aboriginee.

"Any way you view it, Mexican civilization had its origin in Africa." -- Latin-American archaeologist J.A. Villacorta

"It is indisputable that in very ancient times the Negro race occupied our territory [Mexico]." -- Vicente Riva Palacio, historian born in Mexico City, 1837

I guess the obvious is not enough evidence for you. All you have to do is open your eye's man!

Everybody tries to claim Olmec culture for themselves, with the same arguments:

According to Michael Coe, explorer and cultural diffusionist Thor Heyerdahl claimed at least some of the Olmec leadership had Nordic ancestry, a view at least partly inspired by the bearded figure, often referred to as "Uncle Sam" (see right), carved into La Venta Stela 3:

"The presence of Uncle Sam inspired Thor Heyerdahl, the Norwegian explorer and author of ‘’Kon Tiki,’’ among others to claim a Nordic ancestry for at least some of the Olmec leadership. . . [However], it is extremely misleading to use the testimony of artistic representations to prove ethnic theories. The Olmec were American Indians, not Negroes (as Melgar had thought) or Nordic supermen."

Some researchers have argued that the Olmec civilization came into existence with the help of Chinese refugees, particularly at the end of the Shang dynasty.[27] In 1975, Betty Meggers of the Smithsonian Institution argued that the Olmec civilization originated due to Shang Chinese influences around 1200 BC.[28] In a 1996 book, Mike Xu, with the aid of Chen Hanping, claimed that the very same La Venta celts discussed above actually bore Chinese characters.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olmec_alte ... se_origins

Hindu Origins of Olmecs
http://www.viewzone.com/gene.olmec.html

They all argue the same way, but no one has proof. Everybody wants to be the originator of the rich mesoamerican culture. The only proof, which is genetical that we have is that they are of mesoamerican origin.

huh? You get on Azure about fragmenting people by race!. Next thing I know you're off and running with your thread viewtopic.php?f=235&t=48319 fragmenting black people by language and culture?? Two sides of the same coin man! Why can't we all take credit for each others achievements (that's the way it should be) even if the root of humanity is black it doesn't mean we cant ALL take credit for other branches (achievements) in it! One united people, not fragmented by language or culture!

Well im approaching it from a scietifical point of view. And by that there is no black race, no white race and no asian race. Did you know that africa has the biggest genetical diversity in the world? It means that some tribes are genetically closer to europeans then to other african tribes? Black people around the world are not one race, because race doesnt even exist and the black diaspora theory has been proven wrong.

I'll let you tell it Sentenza lol. I stopped reading your post viewtopic.php?f=235&t=48319 when I came across pejorative terms like "sub-Saharan Africa" which is a racist byword for "primitive."

Nope its not. Its your association, because you think because it refers to black africans it must mean something offending. "Sub Saharan" is scientifically totally established and commonly used. Because North Africa is counte to the Arab/Islamic World these days, which is a different culture. That is why there is this distinction. Sub Saharan just means below the Sahara, because north of the sahara are mostly arab muslims. Criticism of this term does not exist, not even by black scholars. It is widely accepted.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sub-Saharan_Africa

The term also suggest an imaginary line, or that a stretch of sand is a border that keeps black people and culture in place!
Culturalist can be just as bad as racist Sentenza .. it's a social construct that keeps everyone in their place by assigning a personality to their race (which you keep telling us you don't believe exist).

If there are no cultural borders, the whole world is the same culture. In this case the desert marks this border, ask any african south of the sahara or any northern african arab. They will tell you the same.

...the ankh is a Kemetic (Egyptian) hieroglyphic that predates the coins found in ancient Cyprus and Asia Minor.

Yes and probably it came from Egypt to these places because Egypt is pretty close. To South America? Im really not convinced, even though you made a point there, because the Ankh is a distinct ancient Egyptian Hieroglyph.

[Sentenza]

As a matter of fact the Aboriginal people are the people on earth most distant from africans, which means a pale russian guy is closer related to a native african, then an aboriginee.

*In Australia.

Despite the difficulties, the scientists made some myth-shattering discoveries. One of them jumps right off the book's cover: a color map of world genetic variation has Africa on one end of the spectrum and Australia on the other. Because Australia's aborigines and sub-Saharan Africans share such superficial traits as skin color and body shape, they were widely assumed to be closely related. But their genes tell a different story. Of all humans, Australians are most distant from the Africans and most closely resemble their neighbors, the southeast Asians. What the eye sees as racial differences - between Europeans and Africans, for example - are mainly adaptations to climate as humans moved from one continent to another.

http://www.2think.org/cavalli-sforza.shtml

[~J~]

Again, there's no evidence of Pre Columbian gene flow in neutral genetics systems like mtDNA and HLA studies show there was no contact between Africa, Europe, Sahara or Sub Saharan and the Americas.

The most plausible scenario is the theory of crossing the Bering strait as Siberians/Asians and Native Americans share common ancestors.

[~J~]

Well im approaching it from a scietifical point of view. And by that there is no black race, no white race and no asian race. Did you know that africa has the biggest genetical diversity in the world? It means that some tribes are genetically closer to europeans then to other african tribes? Black people around the world are not one race, because race doesnt even exist and the black diaspora theory has been proven wrong.

Good point, there are light skin Africans to this very day, take a look at this man from the Kalahari South Namibia, some Africans can be lighter then some Native Americans and even this native San fellow.

[Sentenza]

Well im approaching it from a scietifical point of view. And by that there is no black race, no white race and no asian race. Did you know that africa has the biggest genetical diversity in the world? It means that some tribes are genetically closer to europeans then to other african tribes? Black people around the world are not one race, because race doesnt even exist and the black diaspora theory has been proven wrong.

Good point, there are light skin Africans to this very day, take a look at this man from the Kalahari South Namibia, some Africans can be lighter then some Native Americans and even this native San fellow.

Yep, check this out:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_gene ... stribution





Rainbow of variation: A schematic of worldwide human genetic variation, with colors representing different genetic types. The figure illustrates the great amount of genetic variation in Africa.



Out of Africa: Human odyssey traced in detail
http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/news/1859 ... ced-detail

[Tre]

It is no coincidence. Snakes existed in South America too and all the native religions reflected their zoological environment in their religious symbolism. People have had the same ideas and symbols all over the world without knowing of each other:

According to the surviving Mayan religious texts known as the Books of Chilam Balam, ‘the first inhabitants of Yucatan were the "People of the Serpent". They came from the east in boats across the water with their leader Itzamana, "Serpent of the East",

The black god is black because::::::

around the equator all have pretty dark skin tones because of the UV rays. It doesnt mean that they are from Africa. Black skin is a trait that developes everywhere where there is a heavy sun intensity.

Actually it works this way: Black people (Africans) immigrated north, suffered massive Vitamin D deficiency, those with lest melanin (lighter skin) were rendered healthier and more fertile: so in the end the further north you go the lighter peoples skin. As people moved back to southern climates the reverse becomes true and darker skin is needed to prevent an overdose of vitamin D and skin burning. Today with modern diet and sunscreen vitamin D levels are easily controlled artificially and skin color is redundant.

I had a friend from Paraguay, committed suicide in '05. He was native american and dark as the darkest coffee you can get.
African dark. But he was no african.

How do you know he’s not a black Paraguay??
Black Paraguayans are descended from African slaves brought to Paraguay in the 16th century, and by 1785 made up 11% of the population. Afro-Paraguayan families are a visible presence in communities like Guarambare, Emboscada, and Aregua. In the capital Asunción, there is a community of like 300 of them.

Genetically amongst most people of black skin, there is no link.

Yes, DNA ignores skin colour and instead groups people based on how long they have been isolated (separated) form Africa.

As a matter of fact the Aboriginal people are the people on earth most distant from africans, which means a pale russian guy is closer related to a native african, then an aboriginee.

Aboriginal people are a part of the first migration Out of Africa. Their dark skin tone has nothing to do with UV rays... they were a part of the first migration so they’ve been in isolation (away from Africa longer).

[Tre]

The black god is black because::::::

around the equator all have pretty dark skin tones because of the UV rays. It doesnt mean that they are from Africa. Black skin is a trait that developes everywhere where there is a heavy sun intensity.

You do realize you are confusing two different theories here?? The two are not compatible! This area of thought is the minority view, called the Multiregional Hypothesis… That teaches that mankind evolved five different times (INDEPENDENTLY), on five different continents (each time a different race??). At its core the multiregional hypothesis teaches the preservation of races.

The mainstream model is what you have here called Out of Africa. That holds that Homo sapiens evolved in Africa about 150k yrs ago and migrated to other parts of the globe. mtDNA pretty much agrees with the date of 150k yrs ago. The truth is the “Out of Africa” theory offends racist and those that impute racial meaning into cultural practices because it proposes that blacks entered Europe as the first modern humans.

Everybody tries to claim Olmec culture for themselves, with the same arguments:

I really don’t have a problem with other groups seeing themselves in the Olmecs!

Well im approaching it from a scietifical point of view. And by that there is no black race, no white race and no asian race. Did you know that africa has the biggest genetical diversity in the world? It means that some tribes are genetically closer to europeans then to other african tribes? Black people around the world are not one race, because race doesnt even exist and the black diaspora theory has been proven wrong. .

Huh?? Who said anything about race?? Please point to me where I ever defined black people as a race?? I simply believe that all humans started out black (dark-skinned). Africans moved from their native habitat to other parts of the world and some changed colors over time. They changed because the sun wasn't as strong in the new places they moved to, hence making them lighter in skin.

[Sentenza]

You do realize you are confusing two different theories here?? The two are not compatible! This area of thought is the minority view, called the Multiregional Hypothesis… That teaches that mankind evolved five different times (INDEPENDENTLY), on five different continents (each time a different race??). At its core the multiregional hypothesis teaches the preservation of races.

Hmm. I believe that all people came from africa and that the first humans were black skinned. So i disagree with the hypothesis. I just wanted to show that black skin evolved everywhere, where the sun is shining more intensely.

The mainstream model is what you have here called Out of Africa. That holds that Homo sapiens evolved in Africa about 150k yrs ago and migrated to other parts of the globe. mtDNA pretty much agrees with the date of 150k yrs ago. The truth is the “Out of Africa” theory offends racist and those that impute racial meaning into cultural practices because it proposes that blacks entered Europe as the first modern humans.

Yea i know. Im not offended, i believe the same. Its been widely proven that mankind came out of africa.

I really don’t have a problem with other groups seeing themselves in the Olmecs!

Huh?? Who said anything about race?? Please point to me where I ever defined black people as a race?? I simply believe that all humans started out black (dark-skinned). Africans moved from their native habitat to other parts of the world and some changed colors over time. They changed because the sun wasn't as strong in the new places they moved to, hence making them lighter in skin.

My bad, i was assuming you do.

Yep, so all in all we agree.

[Sentenza]

*

I really don’t have a problem with other groups seeing themselves in the Olmecs!

Me neither, im open to any evidence, i just think its weird how different people claim other peoples cultures again and again.
Hell, the Nazis even tried to claim ancient Egypt for the white germans and pulled some nonsense out of their ass to "prove" it...