question about HGT

[Justatruthseeker]

My friend's dad is asian, but made someone who is mixed race. How many mixes would be required before such a person was not asian? i hope you aren't trying to adopt a one drop rule.

And his dad and mom didn't evolve him by evolution did they. You tell me how many it takes? How many does it take to get to the first Husky from the Wolf (or to the center of a lollipop for that matter)? Don't blame me because you want to tell us man is just an animal, but then insist on putting him on a special classification system distinct from every other animal. Don't foist your problems onto me - they mean nothing in what we observe. So you tell me how many? How many from that Husky or Mastiff to the Chinook; or maybe - just maybe - from the African to the ???? to the Asian?????

Going back further, native americans are descendants of asians, but are not considered asians themselves. Likewise for australian aborigines. Since I have a very small amount of native american ancestry, that means I would be another not-asian that is descended from asians.

Of course they are not considered Asians - they are considered a different infraspecific taxa - it's what I have had to repeat every post. A Husky is not considered a Mastiff - but both are considered to be dogs. Both share almost all the same genes. But again - there is that special elevation in classification for the animal that man is supposed to be, that is suddenly not treated as an animal.

I mean - we are discussing biology here - not politics - correct?

I mean, isn't it me that is supposed to be elevating mankind up above the animals? So why are you treating us differently - that's what I want to know?????

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Case in point.

Agreed - as since no evidence is ever actually presented - there is nothing left to respond to but the useless avoidance tactics.


Case in point.

Case in point.

Case in point.

Case in point.

Case in point.

................ ad infinitum.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

I'm just having fun with you all, but when you decide to get serious and discuss the science instead of the Fairie Dust- let me know. Until then I am off to bed.

 

[lasthero]

Agreed - as since no evidence is ever actually presented - there is nothing left to respond to but the useless avoidance tactics.


Case in point.



Case in point.



Case in point.

................ ad infinitum.

You'll have to forgive. You pretty much just post the same thing over and over and over. Don't feel like going down the rabbit hole today.

If you want to claim victory or...whatever, go ahead.

 

[lasthero]

I'm just having fun with you all, but when you decide to get serious and discuss the science instead of the Fairie Dust

You really want that to be catch phrase, don't you?

 

[[serious]]

And his dad and mom didn't evolve him by evolution did they. You tell me how many it takes? How many does it take to get to the first Husky from the Wolf (or to the center of a lollipop for that matter)? Don't blame me because you want to tell us man is just an animal, but then insist on putting him on a special classification system distinct from every other animal. Don't foist your problems onto me - they mean nothing in what we observe. So you tell me how many? How many from that Husky or Mastiff to the Chinook; or maybe - just maybe - from the African to the ???? to the Asian?????



Of course they are not considered Asians - they are considered a different infraspecific taxa - it's what I have had to repeat every post. A Husky is not considered a Mastiff - but both are considered to be dogs. Both share almost all the same genes. But again - there is that special elevation in classification for the animal that man is supposed to be, that is suddenly not treated as an animal.

I mean - we are discussing biology here - not politics - correct?

I mean, isn't it me that is supposed to be elevating mankind up above the animals? So why are you treating us differently - that's what I want to know?????

Husky isn't the most precise term, but let's call the start of huskies at around 3000 years ago with the Alaskan Malamute. The last common ancestor of wolves and dogs was about 32,000 years ago. Assuming a breeding age of about 3 years, we are looking at about 10,000 generations.

However, huskies have been rebred with wolves since then, so that would not be the most recent wolf in their lineage.

As far as generations from africa to asia, between humans leaving Africa and entering east Asia was 10-20,000 years, so figure about 1 to 2,000 generations.

 

[whois]

for what it's worth, i've noticed that human hieroglyphics associated with the pyramids bear a striking similarity to orientals.

 

[[serious]]

for what it's worth, i've noticed that human hieroglyphics associated with the pyramids bear a striking similarity to orientals.

In what way?

 

[whois]

In what way?

i should correct this to pictures of humans associated with the pyramids.
i remember seeing pictures of orientals of today, and thinking "that resembles those pictures i seen regarding egyptian "royalty".
maybe i just imagined it.
unfortunately i don't have any comparisons to upload.
i do however have some intriguing pictures of "conehead" skulls of that era.

 

[[serious]]

i should correct this to pictures of humans associated with the pyramids.
i remember seeing pictures of orientals of today, and thinking "that resembles those pictures i seen regarding egyptian "royalty".
maybe i just imagined it.
unfortunately i don't have any comparisons to upload.
i do however have some intriguing pictures of "conehead" skulls of that era.

I don't see it.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

You'll have to forgive. You pretty much just post the same thing over and over and over. Don't feel like going down the rabbit hole today.

If you want to claim victory or...whatever, go ahead.

BECAUSE I AM STILL WAITING FOR YOU TO RESPOND WITH SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE OPPOSING WHAT I HAVE SAID AND SUPPORTING WHAT YOU CLAIM.

So far all I have seen is the avoidance.

case in point.

So you'll have to excuse me if I continue to pound it in, because you continue to run away.

I could care less who wins. This is about truth - not winning or loosing. We are supposed to be discussing actual science - not Fairie Dust. The fact that you believe this is about wining or loosing instead of the science explains why so much Fairie Dust is presented.

Don't try to avoid the science. If you do not want to accept science but practice a religion, you know I have no objections. I support freedom of religion 100%. Just stop attempting to pass your pre-conceived beliefs off as science. Because every time you attempt to do so, back to the reality of Asian mating with Asian or African and Husky and Mastiff's will we go.

Until you finally learn to accept 6,000 years of direct empirical evidence.

And no - not because of the myth the earth is 6,000 years old, but because that is as far back as our written and oral observational data goes.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

for what it's worth, i've noticed that human hieroglyphics associated with the pyramids bear a striking similarity to orientals.

Not surprising since over 100 dog infraspecific taxa (breeds) came about from two wolf infraspecific taxa. And that area was the outward migration point for all the separate human infraspecific taxa. You know, the out of Africa scenario.

 

[whois]

I don't see it.

this isn't the comparison i remember.
i have a 5 DVD set that explores the possibility of alien visitation of earth.
although i don't actually buy into most of this stuff, these DVDs have some footage of egypyian hieroglyphics and other artifacts.
that is where the "conehead" files came from.
i'll watch this set again and capture some frames from it.
keep in mind there are 5 of them, so give me some time, 3 or 4 days at least.
i'll try to confirm my observation.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

We would have long skulls today too if we bound them up as children like in the days of old.

https://sp.yimg.com/xj/th?id=OIP.Mce1b11ca4916285dc1d348b618886916H0&pid=15.1&P=0&w=300&h=300

http://www.koanicsoul.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Bound-head.jpg

https://sp.yimg.com/xj/th?id=OIP.M24fde1e733f0fa60d259b56bee185321o0&pid=15.1&P=0&w=300&h=300

https://sp.yimg.com/xj/th?id=OIP.Mc84aa98687b69d5269afe59a68032befH0&pid=15.1&P=0&w=300&h=300

 

[lasthero]

BECAUSE I AM STILL WAITING FOR YOU TO RESPOND WITH SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE OPPOSING WHAT I HAVE SAID AND SUPPORTING WHAT YOU CLAIM.

So far all I have seen is the avoidance.

case in point.

So you'll have to excuse me if I continue to pound it in, because you continue to run away.

I could care less who wins. This is about truth - not winning or loosing. We are supposed to be discussing actual science - not Fairie Dust. The fact that you believe this is about wining or loosing instead of the science explains why so much Fairie Dust is presented.

Don't try to avoid the science. If you do not want to accept science but practice a religion, you know I have no objections. I support freedom of religion 100%. Just stop attempting to pass your pre-conceived beliefs off as science. Because every time you attempt to do so, back to the reality of Asian mating with Asian or African and Husky and Mastiff's will we go.

Until you finally learn to accept 6,000 years of direct empirical evidence.

And no - not because of the myth the earth is 6,000 years old, but because that is as far back as our written and oral observational data goes.

That's nice.

 

[Loudmouth]

show me an Asian that has become anything but an Asian???

Asians are Africans.

 

[Loudmouth]

BECAUSE I AM STILL WAITING FOR YOU TO RESPOND WITH SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE OPPOSING WHAT I HAVE SAID AND SUPPORTING WHAT YOU CLAIM.

Asians are Africans.

That map is based on the mitDNA and yDNA of all human populations. Asians are descended from Africans, as is everyone.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Asians are Africans.

Asians are Africans.

That map is based on the mitDNA and yDNA of all human populations. Asians are descended from Africans, as is everyone.

Hmmm, and yet here you are telling me they are Asians. If you actually believed they were Africans, you'd call them African's and stop calling them Asians.

Of course no one would know who you were talking about if we actually did what you are suggesting, that's probably why we don't.

Of course we all come from one spot in the record, you just have it off a little too far to the south is all - were Noah's son founded that dynasty. Those we now call Africans. Separate from the other founded dynasty by another son - to the east. You simply confuse the founding of the different infraspecific taxa of humans as a spread, instead of the family seperating themselves - creating that illusion you think was migration, because they had familial DNA to start with.

Genesis 10:6The sons of Ham were Cush and Mizraim and Put and Canaan. 7The sons of Cush were Seba and Havilah and Sabtah and Raamah and Sabteca; and the sons of Raamah were Sheba and Dedan.…"

Just like those two wolf infraspecific taxa that through sons and daughters became over 100 separate infraspecific taxa. As is always the case - wanting to make claims not supported and opposed by biologists other claims.

Not to mention nature shows no randomness, but the natural variance of dominant and recessive traits, between individuals of each infraspecific taxa. And in every single case where a new form has come into the record (except those billion year old claims we never observed) we can trace it back to the breeding of two or more different infraspecific taxa within the species to which they belong. But God forbid we then apply that back to the past to the fossil record. Instead insisting it happened completely differently than what we we have observed in the real world for the last 6,000 years.

Of course if the laws of physics varied with acceleration (as E told us they did) then less mass would be the norm in the past and dinosaurs would naturally grow bigger. Oh, but that's another post where you ignore that, my bad........

 

[Loudmouth]

Hmmm, and yet here you are telling me they are Asians. If you actually believed they were Africans, you'd call them African's and stop calling them Asians.

What I am telling you is that Asians are directly descended from Africans. You can name them however you like.

Of course we all come from one spot in the record, you just have it off a little too far to the south is all - were Noah's son founded that dynasty. Those we now call Africans. Separate from the other founded dynasty by another son - to the east. You simply confuse the founding of the different infraspecific taxa of humans as a spread, instead of the family seperating themselves - creating that illusion you think was migration, because they had familial DNA to start with.

You need more than myths. Please present some evidence.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

What I am telling you is that Asians are directly descended from Africans. You can name them however you like.

No they are not - they are directly descended from the different son's of Noah. That they share the basic DNA (Noah's) yet contain other strains - their wives, and his daughters husbands, you confuse as coming from one. Because they did - from Noah. But at the same time geneticists also know their are strands mixed in that have no relationship to those first strands. These come from their wives. So that both Shem's and Ham's descendants share the same basic DNA because they are sons of Noah, you mistake that to mean (one) thing spread outwards. An understandable mistake given your pre-conceived beliefs - but a mistake nonetheless.


I can name them however I like? I believe why just the other day evolutionists were insisting the proper terminology was paramount in understanding. So now we are just calling anything we want anything we want, with no governing rules, because you don't want to apply those same rules we apply to all animals to humans???? Ok, but that doesn't make too much sense to me. Even in the framework of a theory that is senseless to begin with (evolution).

You need more than myths. Please present some evidence.

Sigh!!!!! Asian mates with Asian and produces an Asian. African mates with African and produces an African. Only when Asian mates with African is a new variation observed....... It's that familial relationship of brothers that you confuse as (one) thing becoming many - when we know from 6,000 years of empirical observation that it is always two or more infraspecific taxa.

And if you bothered we could trace that all the way back to when those DNA strands were first separated into two. That combine and become one.