Oi! Who’re you calling non-indigenous?!

Posted by Davis on January 19, 2010, 08:07 PM | #

I wonder what Bowery has to say about this.

Posted by jrackell on January 19, 2010, 09:05 PM | #

do you know why the gradient is more concentrated as a % of population the further away one is from the source.  Why such a low 12% in Turkey if that is where it originated.  Well, maybe the Tatars killed off all the carriers in Turkey.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on January 19, 2010, 10:05 PM | #

When I clicked on the link just now it said “site undergoing maintenance” so the article can’t be accessed at the moment.  It appears from Dan’s summary that this process began 10 K years ago and was completed in 4 K years, so by 4,000 BC it was completed.  There were no Turks in Turkey ten thousand years ago so whoever those men were they weren’t Turks.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on January 19, 2010, 10:30 PM | #

(I was replying there to Dan’s gibe that we and Nick Griffin descend “from Turks.”  We and Nick certainly don’t.)

Posted by Fred Scrooby on January 19, 2010, 10:38 PM | #

(On the other hand, I actually might descend from Turks in part, since I have some Ashkenazi ancestry!  That would be actual Turks, probably much like the ones you see around today, that Ashkenazis are said to partly descend from, not whoever or whatever was in Anatolia ten thousand years ago when the ancestors of Turks were of completely unknown racial character and definitely nowhere near Anatolia.  Put that in your “Euros and Nick Griffin descend from Turks” pipe and smoke it, Dan.)

Posted by PW on January 20, 2010, 01:22 AM | #

also that these new farmers were incredibly successful with the local ladies, leaving their genetic traces in their modern male descendents.

Rather than being great pick-up-artists, it looks like many hunter-gatherer European women were probably ‘acquired’ or even raped after their men were likely murdered; it was a clean sweep, not a peaceful and gradual thing:

“The wheat-beef people [Nelithic farmers] swept across the western European plains in less than 300 years, a conquest some archaeologists refer to as a “blitzkrieg.” A different race of humans, the Cro-Magnons—hunter-gatherers, not farmers—lived on those plains at the time. Their cave art at places such as Lascaux testifies to their sophistication and profound connection to wildlife. They probably did most of their hunting and gathering in uplands and river bottoms, places the wheat farmers didn’t need, suggesting the possibility of coexistence. That’s not what happened, however. Both genetic and linguistic evidence say that the farmers killed the hunters. The Basque people are probably the lone remnant descendants of Cro-Magnons, the only trace.” - http://www.harpers.org/archive/2004/02/0079915

Posted by PW on January 20, 2010, 01:25 AM | #

Agriculture emerged on the human cultural scene about 10,000 years ago

The 10,000 Year Explosion as C&H;put it - the Dawn of Civilization. - http://the10000yearexplosion.com/

Posted by PW on January 20, 2010, 01:42 AM | #

agriculture seems to have spread westward via a new group of Neolithic people from the Near East

Remember that the swarthy Near Easterners or Turks of modern times weren’t necessarily the same people living in the Near East many thousands of years ago; races and ethnic groups aren’t static - the Near East only became a huge Panmixia within the last 2,000-3,000 years or so…before that it was more homogeneous, including many Whites.  Whites of Central and even Northern European origin lived in that area of the world for many thousands of years (specially as a ruling class), and the traces of that exist today.  As an example, during Jesus’ time a group of Celts actually lived in Central Turkey.

And agriculture didn’t just spread westward - it also went east with the Aryans and other Indo-European groups; the Aryans formed the famed Indus Valley Civilization, invented Hinduism (the oldest known religion), and so on living as a White overclass living over the non-White natives in a kind of ‘agrarian dictatorship.’  Eventually though over many centuries their White blood became very diluted with the blood of dark non-White natives and the civilization fell - which is/was the fate of many empires and nations thus far in history.

White mummies who were herders and grain farmers have been found as far east as China from 4,000 years ago; Whites used to also populate Siberia thousands of years ago, and also North Africa, Central Asia, etc.

Posted by Guest Lurker on January 20, 2010, 02:43 AM | #

And agriculture didn’t just spread westward - it also went east with the Aryans and other Indo-European groups; the Aryans formed the famed Indus Valley Civilization, invented Hinduism (the oldest known religion), and so on living as a White overclass living over the non-White natives in a kind of ‘agrarian dictatorship.’ Eventually though over many centuries their White blood became very diluted with the blood of dark non-White natives and the civilization fell - which is/was the fate of many empires and nations thus far in history.

To my knowledge, that’s Colin Renfrew’s theory, but not the most widely accepted one. Aren’t the Indo-Europeans still considered to be the nomadic pastoralists, not agriculturalists, who expanded from the Ukraine starting in about 4500 B.C.? The Indus Civlization was a product of the preceding Dravidian people.

Bryan Sykes a few years back claimed just the opposite- that about 80% of European men were descendants of Ice-Age hunter/gatherers, while the middle eastern farmers were in the minority. You’ve got to wonder about who finances these studies and their agenda, especially at a time when the Turks are pushing furiously to get into the EU and multi-culturalism and “tolerance” towards middle-easterners and north Africans is constantly preached.

Posted by uh on January 20, 2010, 03:45 AM | #

invented Hinduism (the oldest known religion)

Hinduism, that sprawling syncretic religion, 99/100 parts pre-Aryan? Ok. They “invented” it. Shiva and Ganesh and Kali. We see traces of this all over the Indo-European realm. I’ve read of certain Samnite rituals very close to those encountered during Holi and Diwali.

Whites of Central and even Northern European origin lived in that area of the world for many thousands of years

Yes, ELITES (Hittite) and INVADERS (Gaul) lived there, that is all. That is why when you travel through eastern Turkey, among the Zazaki, you see scattered traces of northern European traits like blond or red hair and light eyes, and the majority is swart. This isn’t because “Turks”, once more in the history of this poor word a catch-call for the swarthy “Other”, swarmed into Anatolia; the swarthy cline extends from Anatolia up to the Caucasus and beyond to modern Turkmenistan where, not surprisingly, the types range from Altaic to hither-Asiatic or “Mediterranean”. Like it or not: Dark Man was in Anatolia before White Man. Makes sense, seeing that Anatolia’s closer to the Caucasus and Arabia than Ukraine. Unless you believe the Aryans didn’t stem from a population which involved up that way, and rather somewhere to the south?

As an example, during Jesus’ time a group of Celts actually lived in Central Turkey.

But ... is that how the leopard got its spots?

Aren’t the Indo-Europeans still considered to be the nomadic pastoralists, not agriculturalists, who expanded from the Ukraine starting in about 4500 B.C.?

Correct. He’s off the mark. The usual poetic license taken with the “march of the Titans” across the continent.

Posted by uh on January 20, 2010, 03:55 AM | #

*evolved

when the ancestors of Turks were of completely unknown racial character and definitely nowhere near Anatolia.

Because it couldn’t be that the name “Turk” was extended by an elite group of one race to a mass of other race by long cultural association. This sort of thing does not happen, ever. Nor was there a hugely successful nationalist movement in Turkey which could bring about this sort of false racial consciousness almost by force.

It is amazing that the masses inhabiting a country for millennnia can be written off as “of completely unknown racial character” because the speaker is at pains to align whole peoples and all history with his own misbegotten views. In just this short thread the Anatolian mass-man is both an ur-aryan and a complete unknown. Which is it? when will White Nationalism finally decide for us what an Anatolian is and how the leopard got dem spots?

Posted by Nog Nig on January 20, 2010, 05:58 AM | #

So-called ‘expert’ opinion seems to chop and change so frequently with the ‘genetic question’.
Since modern science has managed to classify and quantify Y-chromosome haplotypes, all sorts of theories have been advanced.Just a few years back the ‘expert’ consensus (as advanced by Sykes and Oppenheimer amongst others), was of an ‘Iberian’ r1b1 refuge.

Posted by Guest Lurker on January 20, 2010, 06:58 AM | #

Hinduism, that sprawling syncretic religion, 99/100 parts pre-Aryan? Ok. They “invented” it. Shiva and Ganesh and Kali. We see traces of this all over the Indo-European realm. I’ve read of certain Samnite rituals very close to those encountered during Holi and Diwali.

I’m new here and not well acquainted with people’s posting styles. Were you being ironic above? As far as I know, though the Rg Veda is thought to be a product of the Aryans, the world of the Veda and its preoccupation with worldly attainments, and its heroes’ quests for imperishable fame through battle deeds, is a far cry from the introspective nature of what is today known as Hinduism. Jean Haudry in his book “The Indo-Europeans” makes the case that Hinduism’s introspective nature and delineation of an imperishable soul as distinct from the perishable material body is something which does indeed belong to the preceding pre-Aryan milieu. There have also been statuettes found of figures sitting in a meditative lotus pose which some archaeologists have interpreted to be representations of Shiva, and these precede the advent of the Aryans. In fact, modern linguists are even concluding that the Sanskrit language of the Rg Veda itself contains a significant contribution from the Dravidic substratum, suggesting that by the time the Veda was written down, the Aryans had already probably been significantly influenced by the Dravidic Indus people, who, after all, did possess a more advanced sedentary culture, and possibly a more advanced religious ideology as well. Let’s face it: the Indus Valley was a full fledged settled agricultural civilization, while the Aryans were horse nomads. So the first sentence of your paragraph above might very well be very accurate. I was just thrown off by the rest of it.

Posted by Lurker on January 20, 2010, 07:00 AM | #

Seems to me a bit like the boilerplate liberal argument that (assuming out of Africa is even true) we are all Africans.

The unspoken part of this ploy is that if we are descended from an African population we are just the same as modern Africans, therefore racism or whatever is irrational. Yet all that we can really say is we and modern Africans have a common ancestor, one could just as easily say that modern Africans have diverged from than ancestor more than we have, thus leaving the whole argument in tatters. Mind you I dont really know all the archaeological, genetic maguffin that supposed to back all this up - and nor do the experts by the sounds of it.

So claiming we are descended from a a group thats desribed as “Turkish” doesnt go very far at all.

Posted by Stephen Wordsworth on January 20, 2010, 07:24 AM | #

So if the the Y chromosome comes from the farmer and the Mitochondria comes from the native cromagnons. This likely means that the when settling new teritory the farmers killed off the native men and then took the native women into concubinage. This conquest progressed across the continent as the farmers outnumbered the hunters by there greater population density and reproduction rate from being settled. But as each generation of pioneers spreads across the continent taking native wives there decendent will have more and more native DNA each generation until the DNA of the original farmers has been diluted into nothing except for the Y chromosome preserved through the male lineage of course. The discovery of farming in the Black Sea region is the most likely origin for the Indo European languages. But genetisist cant seem to agree on the baseline mutation rate this Y chromosome spread is exackly the same one Openheimer dated to the Ice Age. There will be a rival scientist writing a counter paper soon enough. Perhaps the Mitochondri just mutates at a faster rate being an organel that devides more frequenty than nuclear DNA.

Posted by Captainchaos on January 20, 2010, 07:40 AM | #

Uh has got mad verbal IQ.  He should be invited to write a post on the over-extended extensive power of the ego ideal, or whatever it was (I think he means WNs are deluding themselves because it makes them feel good, but who the hell knows).  It’s what the “mass-man,” er, the people, want to see.  Also, a how-to in blending empty jargon with clear, fluid sentence construction would be helpful.  Who cares if it’s bullshit if it smells like a rose?

Posted by Gudmund on January 20, 2010, 07:44 AM | #

It is amazing that the masses inhabiting a country for millennnia can be written off as “of completely unknown racial character” because the speaker is at pains to align whole peoples and all history with his own misbegotten views. In just this short thread the Anatolian mass-man is both an ur-aryan and a complete unknown. Which is it? when will White Nationalism finally decide for us what an Anatolian is and how the leopard got dem spots?
>Uh

You’re right, if one looks at Turkey’s genetic history it is evident from the high degree of heterogeneity that Turkey has been a melting pot for thousands of years.  Anatolia has been for so long a crossroads that one cannot realistically claim it’s heritage as Aryan even though various Aryans did at one point or other live there (i.e. Hittites, Ionian Greeks, etc).

Posted by B Ford on January 20, 2010, 09:11 AM | #

It’s been a bitter pill to swallow for those European males (like Nick Griffin) who prided themselves on their ancestral connections to the ‘indigenous’ peoples. It turns out that Griffin, like 80% of western European males, is almost certainly not a descendant of the intrepid Cro-Magnon hunter-gatherers who, 12,000 years ago re-populated the continent from the Ice Age refugia in Cantabria, Italy and the Balkans, but rather of parvenu Turkish farmers instead.

This term ‘descent’ is abused in these discussions, go back 1000 years ago and i have around 1 million people i am directly descended from (that’s a wild guess), they may not have all contributed DNA to me (but then again, i have a whole lot of DNA) but i am descended from them. I am sure Nick gets some DNA from his hunter gatherer female ancestors (if he was that hung up about it) in any event, it seems certain he is descended from at least some of them.  The hunter gatherer females are descended from hunter gatherer males - so Nick is indeed extremely likely to be descended from them too.

One things is for sure the neolithics didn’t send the hunter gatherer men out of the country on a boat to Africa and Asia where they wait for the chance to reclaim their rightful ancestral homeland like zionists! Changes nothing in the question of who is ‘indigenous’ to specific countries.

I anticipate that they will find a very lowly represented DNA element (in terms of numbers) and claim that is more indigenous, the term ‘indigenous’ can only be safely applied to very small groups (from a politically correct point of view) if the macropolitical objective is to promote the idea of immigration and racial transformation as natural. On wikipedia they only ever apply the word to tiny groups like the Sami, who are non threatening in a political sense due to the size of their population.

Posted by Gudmund on January 20, 2010, 09:12 AM | #

Has anyone else noticed that Fjordman has become significantly more racialist of late?  Is it even the same guy?  He sounds a lot more radical than I remember.

Via Mangan’s:

Van Wijk: I strongly suspect that the only viable solution for whites is physical separation. We need to carve out a land for ourselves and keep it that way, otherwise we will perish. The alternative is that we maintain a vicious cycle where whites create dynamic societies that are overrun by inferior peoples who are incapable of sustaining them. This cycle will finally end when the existence of white communities itself ends.

I don’t blame individuals who want to move somewhere else to improve their future. The thought has crossed my mind, too. However, what we are facing now is in all likelihood a pan-Western crash. If you want to avoid this entirely you must leave the entire Western world. Problem is, this is not a good long-term solution for our people. Sooner or later we have to make a stand and fight somewhere.

Moving within the West, from an urban Multicultural hellhole to a minor town, is a different matter.

Radical Feminism was an extremely successful Marxist ploy to destroy our civilization from within. Despite the fact that white Western men have been kinder to their women than men from virtually any other civilization, young Western women are convinced, thanks to generations of Marxist brainwashing, that we are the single greatest obstacle to a just world. Every Western girl through our education system is turned into a weapon of mass destruction against her own civilization. White women shouldn’t breed at all or should get mixed-race babies. They should never get white children. This policy was specifically designed to destroy us.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on January 20, 2010, 09:24 AM | #

Uh is saying that what are known today as Turks are not something called “Turkic people” genetically, but the Turk language, culture, and name were applied to/imposed on them by conquest or by their enemies or by neighbors who didn’t know a lot about geography or whatever, and they’ve actually been in Anatolia since forever, the same people as now, they didn’t come from anywhere else, they were always where they are now, in fact they’re not even Turks, so if we came from Anatolia we must’ve come from the same ones who are called Turks today.  He says the actual genetic Turks were a thin layer (who presumably did come, just this thin layer, from the northeast two thousand miles away and took over), and those actual genetic Turks have long since melted into the pre-existing Anatolian brown man.  All right, I could as well say a thin layer of someone else in Anatolia ten thousand years ago invented farming and spread Y-chromosomes into Europe.

By the way, what were, or where were, the ancestors of the Turkic peoples ten thousand years ago is completely unknown, which is what I said or meant in my earlier comment.  Whether they were differentiated at all or in what way or to what extent is utterly unknown.

Many good points in this thread.  Lurker’s point, for example:  if it were shown that whites were chimpanzees three generations ago that would not mean they should revert back to being chimpanzees, move to the jungle and start swinging from trees.  “But,” the Jews will say, “only three generations ago you Euros were chimps swinging from trees:  three generations is such a short time; surely you must be the same as chimps now.  If you deny that, you’re nothing but racists, anti-Semites, and xenophobes.”  The answer to give the Jews is:  whatever the genealogy, however long or short, we’re whites now, not chimps, and plan on staying that way.  Or Stephen Wordsworth’s comment:  say you put two white men and a hundred Bantu women together and come back in a thousand years.  What will you find?  Negroes.  What percentage of the Negro men you find will have a white Y-chromosome marker?  100%.  Or the commenter who said that just a couple of years ago they were claiming exactly the opposite, that 80% were indigenous since the ice age and 20% stone age farmers from the levant, and we need to look into who funds these things and their interpretations?  Good comments thread, guys.  Dan Dare got a little carried away there with that flimsy choice of log entry and his anti-Nick-Griffin gibes.

Posted by Captainchaos on January 20, 2010, 10:48 AM | #

Dan “Death From Above” Dare seems to at once want globe trotting cosmopolitanism and genetic preservation of Nordics, friendship with and admiration for the Krauts yet countenance their near total destruction without blinking, vulgar White Amerikwans to organized politically in a manner that will allow them to at least be elected to the office of Racist Dogcatcher but chides Griffin in a way that potentially reveals a lingering dissatisfaction with the way Griffo is going about doing just that in Britain.  Not a man easily satisfied.

Posted by Dan Dare on January 20, 2010, 12:19 PM | #

I had hoped that the references to ‘Turks’ would have been understood in the ironic sense that they were intended since any fule knos that, whatever they were, the bearers of the marker M269 who emerged from Anatolia ca 9kya were certainly not Turkish. Their ancestors (the Turks’) were still several thousand km further to the east at that point.

I’ll be back later with some more (non-ironic) comment but in the meantime would like to note to note that Griffin deserves all he got and still gets for his idiotic remarks on QT about the origins of the population of the British Isles.

The PLoS website still seems to be having difficulties serving articles so when I return I will post some extracts from the original report which I downloaded yesterday.

Posted by PW on January 20, 2010, 01:15 PM | #

I will take what I wrote above a step further by stating there is evidence that Whites, that is people with recognizable White/European features, i.e. Nords + Central Europeans, used to populate the entire general area of the ‘Cradle of Civilization’ beginning a many thousands of years ago—they dominated Mesopotamia, the Fertile Crescent, the Near East, the Middle East, and that whole general area and initiated the rise of the Neolithic (agriculture and the consequent birth of civilization) as we know it. 

We know for sure that people with White/European features and skin were in Iran for a long time, and also Afghanistan, India, Central Asia, even Nepal and parts of China, all of these areas are well east of Mesopotamia, so it is positive that Nords or people with mostly Nordic or similarly European features also lived in Mesopotamia before they went further east.  There they initiated civilization after civilization, the first known in human history: Sumeria, Elam, Akkadia, Babylonia, Assyria, and so on.  Certainly they were there by the time of the earliest proto-urban settlements with several thousand inhabitants which emerged in the Neolithic, whith the first known city to house several tens of thousands were Memphis and Uruk, by the 31st century BC.  They likely dominated the whole area regardless if they were in the numerical majority or not. 

Over centuries and thousands of years, some White blood eventually crept in to the non-White blood there, often via the local peoples who were used as agricultural slaves or manual laborers - those people, with a newfound ‘hybrid vigor’ of their admixture with European blood, simply learned/copied the agricultural methods from their masters and eventually carried them back to Europe along with their genes, spreading out all over the areas of Mesopotamia, the Fertile Crescent, the Near East, and the Middle East which were once ruled by Nords, bringing their partial non-White genes plus any remaining Nordic genes back in to Europe with them.

A similar pattern likely occurred in the other places I mentioned in previous posts - in ancient Egypt the earlier mummies have White features; same physical and genetic evidence is found in Central Asia, Siberia, and so on.

Posted by Guest Lurker on January 20, 2010, 04:06 PM | #

I will take what I wrote above a step further by stating there is evidence that Whites, that is people with recognizable White/European features, i.e. Nords + Central Europeans, used to populate the entire general area of the ’Cradle of Civilization‘ beginning a many thousands of years ago—they dominated Mesopotamia, the Fertile Crescent, the Near East, the Middle East, and that whole general area and initiated the rise of the Neolithic (agriculture and the consequent birth of civilization) as we know it.

We know for sure that people with White/European features and skin were in Iran for a long time, and also Afghanistan, India, Central Asia, even Nepal and parts of China, all of these areas are well east of Mesopotamia, so it is positive that Nords or people with mostly Nordic or similarly European features also lived in Mesopotamia before they went further east.

Where is the evidence for these claims?  Have there been new discoveries I’m totally unaware of? It sounds like a flipped version of Afro-centrism. The white European types most likely expanded from the north pontic region after 4500 B.C., reaching Western China as the Afanasievo by 3500B.C., long after the advent of agriculture. The Elamites were meds, Afghans were Pamiro-Ferghana Meds, the Sumerians Armenoids and Meds, etc.  The Indo-Euros were intruders subsequent to the rise of agriculture, unless you go along with Colin Renfrew’s thesis that the Anatolian farmer’s spoke an Indo-European language, which would make the original Indo-Euros meds.

Posted by Drifter on January 20, 2010, 08:08 PM | #

There were no Turks in Turkey ten thousand years ago so whoever those men were they weren’t Turks.

Correct. We’ll find a place called Galatia, inhabited by Galatian Celts somewhere between the Neolithic and today. They gave up their indigenous traditions, Christianized, swore allegiance to some foreign ideas/ruler, then whored themselves out as mercenaries and traders. Later, having by then fully rotted from the inside, Persians poured in and readily displaced the by then (en)feeble(d) Galatians. We call the place Turkey now and they remain culturally strong. They also want to keep pouring in to where the weaklings are ready to give up again.

Posted by Guest Lurker on January 20, 2010, 09:57 PM | #

Correct. We’ll find a place called Galatia, inhabited by Galatian Celts somewhere between the Neolithic and today. They gave up their indigenous traditions, Christianized, swore allegiance to some foreign ideas/ruler, then whored themselves out as mercenaries and traders. Later, having by then fully rotted from the inside, Persians poured in and readily displaced the by then (en)feeble(d) Galatians. We call the place Turkey now and they remain culturally strong. They also want to keep pouring in to where the weaklings are ready to give up again.

Agree with the spirit of your post. So true. You’ve got to hand it to non-whites like the Turks. They are ferociously united as one and incredibly aggressive in pressing for their unceasing dream of a pan-turkic revived empire. Non-whites never yield, while whites frequently do. They’re building madrasas schools, islamic centers, and mosques all over Europe and parts of the Balkans, with much of the money being supplied by Turkey and other islamic states-gradual and not-so-subtle colonization without resistance. The Turks actually still see the Balkans as their sphere of influence. I just read somewhere that the turkish foreign minister recently made comments to that effect.

Posted by Gladiator on January 21, 2010, 09:19 AM | #

11,000 BCE in the very tip of the Southern most extreme where now it is called the Mediterranean Basin, when the whole Continent of Europe was in the Ice Age, there was a tiny spec of land where warm weather allowed the first man to grow food and hunt game.
Small elephants roamed the plains of North Africa and traversed the continental shelf. Pigmy hippos bathed in marshy ponds. Giant rats fed on grass. Two longed legged storks graced the skies. To give thanks to mother earth, man built the Temples of Hagar Qim.
These were our first people.

Posted by Dan Dare on January 21, 2010, 03:57 PM | #

Having now reviewed the article, all I can add is that, apart from driving the final nail into the coffin of the PCT, it raises as many questions as it answers.

The most important one in my mind is the relationship between language and population genetics. If, as the article suggests, the R1b1b2 (M269) ‘clan’ arose in Anatolia around 7000 kya then it is unlikely, perhaps impossible, that they were the transmitters of the Proto-Indo-European language into Europe.

So, if the M269 clan (which eventually begat the Celts and most other western Europeans) were not Indo-European linguistically, who was responsible for the spread of PIE and its daughter dialects throughout Europe?

Posted by PW on January 22, 2010, 05:04 AM | #

Where is the evidence for these claims?

You find physical and genetic evidence all of the areas I mentioned; for instance, certain remnants of Near Easterners, Middle Easterners, Afghans, Iranians, Indians, Pakis, and even some Nepalese have light skin and non-brown eyes—very light skin and non-brown eyes (whether blue, green, gray, etc) ONLY evolved in Europe proper within the last 10,000-15,000 or so, i.e. around the time of the start of the Neolithic.  Non-brown eyes ONLY evolved in Europe proper, so why are they still sometimes found (especially amongst the ruling castes there) in Persia, Afghanistan, the Near/Middle East, North Africa (aside from the more recent genetic influence of the Germanic Vandals), and so on?  Why does a caste system based on skin color still exist in parts of Pakistan and India?  Why do so many Hindu holy men in Nepal have faces with semi-European features as well as thick beards, beards which the local native Asiatic/Nepalese populace cannot similarly grow?  Why are many Arabs and Middle Easterners of the ruling caste so often much more light skinned and also often much taller than the Arab average?  Evidence that blue-eyed people used to populate Siberia was recently discovered, but those people have now been subsumed in to the Asian population there - this also happened all over in Central Asia (the ‘Stans’) too.  Why have mummies with definite White/European physical features plus DNA been found in tombs in ancient Egypt, in parts of modern China, and elsewhere?

The only answer is that many thousands of years ago Whites from Europe with Nordish features spread out all over the place in wave after wave, but those people were eventually subsumed by the natives and/or non-White immigrants (as is now happening in the USA and parts of Europe), though some remnants still exist all over the places which I mentioned.

Posted by PW on January 22, 2010, 05:24 AM | #

G:To give thanks to mother earth, man built the Temples of Hagar Qim.

These were our first people.

Yup.  They built the first temples on the Mediterranean island of Malta, ancient megalithic temples which are the oldest known free standing structures on Earth—some of those Maltese temples built by Our People go back at least 6,000 years, maybe more.

There were definitely other temples which we haven’t discovered and likely never will, probably ones in Europe which were wiped out en masse by Ice Age glaciers.  The Ice Age surely ruined numerous other megalithic sites on the European landmass, ones which were located in Europe proper—as the mile+ thick glacial ice retreated they of course ruined everything in sight as they gashed and ruined the landscape completely, leaving no archaeological evidence of even older megalithic temples to be found.  There may be some in North Africa and elsewhere which we haven’t found yet though.

Our People also worked on compiling the first astronomical and astrological data - their temples were very often aligned with the cycles of the Sun, Moon, planets, and even stars in some cases.  It was a main part of their religion. —-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_archaeoastronomical_sites_by_country

Wherever major megalithic sites are found that is where Our People were also at one point or another. - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_megalithic_sites

Posted by Guest Lurker on January 22, 2010, 04:04 PM | #

The only answer is that many thousands of years ago Whites from Europe with Nordish features spread out all over the place in wave after wave, but those people were eventually subsumed by the natives and/or non-White immigrants (as is now happening in the USA and parts of Europe), though some remnants still exist all over the places which I mentioned.

As I said, it is well known that Indo-Europeans probably spread out from the north Pontic region sometime in the 5th millenium b.c. But your original claim that they were the originators of civilization in these areas you cite or that they were the ones who spread agriculture is unproven. They were pastoral horse nomads who came as invaders to these agricultural civilizations. You’re filling gaps with unproven speculations.

Posted by Guest Lurker on January 22, 2010, 04:08 PM | #

“Yup.  They built the first temples on the Mediterranean island of Malta, ancient megalithic temples which are the oldest known free standing structures on Earth—some of those Maltese temples built by Our People go back at least 6,000 years, maybe more.”

Nope. These are the oldest megalithic structures in the world, predating stonehenge by 6000 years, and are about 11,000 years old. These are in what is eastern Turkey/Kurdistan region.

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/gobekli-tepe.html

Posted by Calvin on January 24, 2010, 09:14 AM | #

A genetic analysis that conclude that Europeans were mostly descended from agricultural populations that drifted into Europe from the Turkey, conflates with the claim made by geneticists that blue eyes first emerged around 10,000 years ago among human groups that inhabited the Black Sea region and
Belyaev’s canine experiments prove that blue eyes and depigmentation are a consequence of behavioural selection. all this study indicates is that during the neolithic period a more highly evolved race of humans emerged in Europe. 10,000 years isn’t indigenous?

Posted by Fred Scrooby on January 24, 2010, 10:44 AM | #

“10,000 years isn’t indigenous?”  (—Calvin)

Good point but what the usual suspects are hoping will get people to drop their opposition to being turned into Turks is the implied idea that ten thousand years is a relatively short time:  “Hey look, you were Turks just ten short thousand years ago.  So you’re really the same as them, get it?  Any differences you think you see are just optical illusions caused by your racism, xenophobia, patriarchy, sexism, anti-LGBTism, and oh yes I almost forgot, your anti-Semitism, the most important of all!  Drop that shit and get with the future, man!  The future is you and the Turks getting together and breeding a whole new brown race

under Jewish worldwide dictatorship to be headquartered in Jerusalem with only the Jews exempted, worldwide, from being required to brownify themselves — the Jews can stay the same but no one else

.  (Hey just ignore that last part, OK?  The part that’s crossed out, don’t read that, it was a mistake.)  So get with the

pogrom

program and don’t be a white-hood-wearing knuckle dragger, OK man?  Repeat after me, I am the same as the Turks, I am the same as the Turks, I am the same as the Turks.  Say that to yourself a thousand times a day and you’ll be fine!  Get all your friends to say it too!  (But not any of your Jewish friends, that would be anti-Semitism — and don’t forget, they’re exempt anyway.  Why are they exempt?  Hey don’t ask any questions man, it’s all been planned out and it’s all for the best.  Would I lie to you?)”

Posted by Dan Dare on January 24, 2010, 01:09 PM | #

10,000 years isn’t indigenous?

Yes of course, but the Y-Hg R1b lineage has not been present within the European continent for anywhere close to that amount of time (and only about 4-5000 years in the Isles). The only existing lineage which is actually indigenous to Europe is I*. The first re-colonisers of northern Europe in the upper Paleolithic were I1 and I2b (there may have been some other lineages present as well but these are now extinct).

I* is these days still present in most western European countries but at relatively low levels compared to R1b (eg around 10% vs 75% in the British Isles).

Note to Fred: Nobody is claiming that the populations who entered Europe during the Neolithic were Turks, merely that the lineage that their (male) descendants belong to (R1b1b2) first arose in Anatolia around 8000 years ago.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on January 24, 2010, 03:02 PM | #

“Note to Fred:  Nobody is claiming that the populations who entered Europe during the Neolithic were Turks, merely that the lineage that their (male) descendants belong to (R1b1b2) first arose in Anatolia around 8000 years ago.”  (—Dan Dare)

You and I both know that’s not how it’s going to be marketed by the usual suspects via whatever popular media coverage it may get.

Posted by PW on January 25, 2010, 01:57 AM | #

GL:“Nope. These are the oldest megalithic structures in the world, predating stonehenge by 6000 years, and are about 11,000 years old. These are in what is eastern Turkey/Kurdistan region. - http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/gobekli-tepe.html”

Yes, GL - you are right.  The structures at Göbekli Tepe definitely predate the Maltese ones as far as archaeologists can tell.

I often forget about Göbekli Tepe because the exact extent of its age was only discovered around 2 years ago (or even less) - I remember the initial news reports of that site, and I like so many others were totally shocked by its amazing age.

Also, stupid me, I trusted what the Wikipedia article said about the Maltese megalithic structures: that “They are the oldest free-standing structures on Earth.”  That should read “oldest known in Europe.” - see the last sentence the second opening paragraph @ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megalithic_Temples_of_Malta

But of course, ancient Whites could’ve very well built those uber-ancient megalithic structures in Turkey at Göbekli Tepe given their earlier settlement there in Anatolia, the Near East, and the Middle East.

Posted by Wanderer on January 26, 2010, 08:44 PM | #

Blowhards can go on and on about genetics “proving” this and that all they want, but one fact remains a fly in their ointment:
Physical Anthropology disproves the ‘(Near-)Total Neolithic Replacement Theory’

1.) Europe today has many, many very obvious and phenotypically-unmixed CroMagnoid physical types. [People who have the same exact features as the CroMagnon skulls from tens of millennia ago in Europe.]
2.) The areas seen as having most representatives of the CroMagnid type correlate with a higher presence of R1b Y-lines. (I.e., Ireland: Almost no trace of CroMagnon ancestry in Ireland, you say? Yet r1b reaches near total saturation in western Ireland!).
3.) The Caucasoids in West-Asia while CroMagnon was skulking around Europe were not physically CroMagnid, but more Nordid and Mediterranid.

Given these three facts, how would You interpret European-Man’s ancestral story?
It sounds to me that the quasi-P.C. blowhards arguing for the ‘(Near-)Total Neolithic Replacement Theory’ decided on a conclusion then used the facts to fit it, rather than shaping a theory from the facts. This is common in the sciences, sadly.

Obviously, European-Man has racial traces of many waves of humans, almost certainly even Neanderthal at a trace level. But a Cro-Magnon “racial base” [i.e., the bulk of ancestry] for Us seems most logical. Anyone arguing against that has the formidable task of explaining away the facts-on-the-ground in terms of physical anthropology.

.
.
[Note: The way silly theories like ‘(Near-)Total Neolithic Replacement’ are given credence today is that human physical anthropology is a science suppressed and even demonized since 1945. Before then, a great deal of work was done in all countries. (It was never “Nazi science”—more work was done in the USA, as in Dr.Coon.) Today, nearly none is done by anyone.]

Posted by Justin on February 16, 2010, 03:06 PM | #

Wow, you guys are mind boggling—you really should be repeating, “I am just like the Turks”.

The Turks of Turkey have the same genetic makeup as the people who have lived in Anatolia for thousands of years, excepting a very small genuinely Turkic contribution.

If you guys have a problem with Turks, and by some bizarre stretch of the imagination do not consider them white (They’re too brown?!?! haven’t you seen a pale Turk? Or a tan Englishmen before?!?!?!), then you’re also going to have to disclaim any giant stone monuments in Turkey as having been built by white people, since the people who built them likely had the same genetic makeup as the people who live in Turkey today.

Once more, the Turks who live in Turkey have the same genes in them that have been present in Anatolia for thousands of years. Any simple googling will show this to be the only reasonable surmise, and the one which all science on the matter has found.

So, either Anatolia was never white, or it still is. And if it never was, the genes you are all holding which sprang from the near East say something.

Brownifying—you guys are amazing… Why don’t you campaign to shut down tanning booths in your own country? You do realize that any population of the most lily white racists would evolve until their descendants sported a more pleasing bronze hue over a few thousand years, right? Would they then become unworthy, simply by virtue of a skin color change? You must also have a problem with Sicilians and Greeks, and Armenians, since they are certainly as dark as the Turks (not to mention the genetic kinship).

Posted by indus on June 04, 2010, 09:48 PM | #

Posted by PW on January 20, 2010, 05:42 AM | #

‘’the Aryans formed the famed Indus Valley Civilization, invented Hinduism (the oldest known religion), and so on living as a White overclass living over the non-White natives in a kind of ‘agrarian dictatorship.’ ‘’

The Aryans were not the fathers of the Indus valley civilization. Archeological evidence shows civilization existed and bloomed in the Indus valley long before the Aryans came on the scene. Archeological evidence also shows the Indus valley civilization fell into decline exactly around the period the Aryans arrived.

‘’Eventually though over many centuries their White blood became very diluted with the blood of dark non-White natives and the civilization fell - which is/was the fate of many empires and nations thus far in history.’’

The presence of racial traits in a given area doesn’t soley constitute proof/evidence that this particular race bearing those racial traits is the creator of a particular civilization for it is entirely possible the opposite can be true hence the reason more concrete evidence is required. In this case the Aryans far from creating the Indus valley civilization, destroyed it.

Archaeological evidence fully supports the inhabitants of the Indus valleys met a fateful end at the hands of the Aryans. Archaeological evidence clearly shows massacres took place in the Indus valley coinciding with the arrival of the Aryans. The Aryans massacred the men and raped the women and then followed to impose a strict caste system onto its surviving inhabitants and that is the REAL TRUTH behind the white skin of the present day inhabitants of the region and not the fantasy that many like to perpetuate of brave Aryan warrior clans on horseback coming and subduing an uncivilized folk with there charm, creating a beautiful civilization and living happily ever after.

Archaeology cannot and does not lie and with progress of archaeology time will place the Aryans within there rightful place in history as the race that destroyed the Indus valley civilization.  The Aryans were NOT the fathers of the Indus Valley civilization.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:uM6ZhyAwitIJ:mehmoodahmed.blogspot.com/2008/11/aryan-invasion-and-fall-of-indus-empire.html+aryans+massacred+the+indus+vally+inhibitants&cd=6&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk