Race, Ancestry, Cline and Genotype

f977bdda850d02aa7cdd17577f5590ed8ac3ca82

‘Their aim is to eliminate any formidable opposition to their “man made arrangements” which were based on the idea of “race”.’

Beautiful commentary here. I don’t remember IMA’s hiding this. Wasn’t it right up until they massacred white Jews for the last time in Western Europe (out of hundreds of attacks), that they were adamant race was so important that they couldn’t free certain nations from direct colonialism based on their racial composition?

Whenever I hear mainstream Liberal cronies talk foolishness about race and claim anthropological differences are fake I always ask them, how many non-Jews were killed marked down as Jews by the Nazis? None that I am aware of. This stupid debate about ethnicity and race meaning nothing is fuelling the attempted breeding out of certain groups and the creation of permanent socio-economic differences which remain the same.

Geneticists spend a lot of time inserting opinions on science and them claiming it is science, I have yet to name this, but this is part of the new IMA religion. The Big Bang + Evolution + Secular Humanism (Human Rights) and the use of ‘Globalisation/the International Community’ for missionary purposes. None of this is based in fact, it is opinions on the origins of the universe and life, origins of people and their newly found ‘sacred laws’ which they attempt to impose on the world.

In terms of race, the latest trend by the European Internationalist mainstream is to claim there is no race for various reasons. No race due to the fact it is difficult to define and prove, but so is the Big Bang, so why make up Big Bang theories and proof but not do the same for something more important in people’s life? No race due to genetic differences, who said within races there aren’t genetic differences? These pseudo-scientists use the differences between Afrikans in particular to claim that race is made up, even though they acknowledge Afrikans were here first and Afrikans have the oldest and most DIVERSE genetic lineages. They admit that Afrikans have phylogenetic similarity due to their proximity and their ancestry (which is what race really is).

dendrogram15

Within the clines they become genetically distant due to, physical distance, the new environment requires new genetic and phenotypic adaptations which leads to mutations in the genes, the correlating and interrelation of where these genes and phenotypes occur creating the phylogenetic tree. Clines or Morphs are the phenotype demonstrated by phylogenetic similarity (ancestry and genetic mutations from previous genes), with each cline having an origin and demonstrating admixture in Clinal Zones where two clines meet. Admixture results in shared genes with groups that are clearly distantly related by cline, they become genetically intertwined to a degree where they either absorbed trace amounts of genes from other groups or became a new, divergent, commixed phenotype. This can easily be seen by the Caucasian peoples differing appearances by the Clinal Zones across Eurasia and North Afrika, when they dispersed from in Central Asia fairly recently in the scope of the existence of people as a whole.

cossacks-youth                                                    Caucasian invaders of Siberia, this group is called the Cossacks

photo-1-dsc_3033-version-4-590x209                                        East Asian peoples of Siberia

811da887d1c617f48a514f84d318b1ae                                                            Caucasian nomads admixed with the Dravidian natives in northern South Asia, similar admixture also in Persia

swy1820indian20women                                                                                    Dravidians, natives of South Asia

building-capacity-in-entrepreneurship-saudi-arabia-2007                                                Caucasian slave and invader descendants in the Southwest Asia

foto_yemen_al_khawkha_09                                                              Mahra people, indigenous to Southern Arabia and also present in the Horn of Afrika

cooperative-tirizit-in-arazane-481                        Caucasian slave and invader progeny, mulattoes in North Afrika

berber-women                                              Afrikan Berbers, aboriginal to Afrika they have roots in the Sahara, Afrikans that were once widespread in the Middle East and the Horn of Afrika

‘The African has distinct traits secured by its segregation on the continent of Africa which occurred over hundreds of thousands of years. These traits are what most people refer to when they distinguish Africans from other races (subspecies of the African).’ Basic summing up of how clines were developed by Bhekizitha.

https://acbnj.wordpress.com/2015/07/05/race-is-not-a-social-construct/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cline_(biology)

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

Even in Afrikan history in the Americas, we were taken as slaves for two primary reasons both of which are related to our genes which are different from other groups due to out different ancestry. Afrikans were brought to the Americas because Afrkan civilisations were advanced in the 16th and 17th centuries, there were many skilled people in metallurgy, agriculture, music, warfare, catering, medicinal sciences, the natural sciences ect. This was due to Afrikans genes, they were able to develop these further crafts during the European ‘Dark Ages’ aka ‘Middle Ages’ when much of Eurasia suffered from plagues. The second ties in with this, our ancestry and with it exposure to ‘Old World’ diseases allowed us to be used as slaves by Europeans, as we were able to last longer than both the European and American Indians. Even down to the reason Afrikans predominate in numbers in the Caribbean region is due to Afrikan genes and our origin in the tropics, with Afrikan bodies been tropically adapted. Even with mass invasions and admixture, whites in Brazil are constantly loosing numbers as they weren’t designed to survive in such an environment.

Indigenous Afrikan spirituality has understood from the start, it is ancestry that separates people and creates identities right down to each individual having a different immediate family from an extended family of related people called relatives. Clans, tribes (ethnicities) and nations are defined by their ANCESTRY and history, not what they want to think or falsely claim is the majority of their ancestry.

‘Akanfo (ah-kahn’-foh) in the Twi language of the Akan means Akan people. Akanfo originated in ancient Khanit, also called Keneset (Ancient Nubia), at the beginning of human existence upon Asaase (Earth). This is the region of contemporary Sudan and South Sudan in the Eastern region of Afuraka/Afuraitkait (Africa). We eventually migrated around the world. Some Akanfo migrated north of Khanit and settled ancient Kamit (ancient Egypt), while others remained in Khanit. Over the millennia, Akanfo migrated to West Afuraka/Afuraitkait (West Africa) establishing the ancient civilization of Akana (Khanat – Ghana). Some Akanfo were also a component of the Kanem empire (pre-Bornu), the original/authentic Black Berber empire (Abibiri-fo) and the Kong empire (Kan) before ultimately migrating to and settling in the areas of contemporary Ghana (Akana) and Ivory Coast. Akanfo presently comprise approximately 45.3 percent of the population of Ghana (11,000,000) and approximately 42.1 percent of the population of Ivory Coast (9,000,000). Collectively, there are over 20,000,000 Akanfo in West Afuraka/Afuraitkait, including smaller populations in Togo, Burkina Faso and other areas.’

kakait

http://www.odwirafo.com/Akanfo_Nanasom.html

The history of the Akan people and other Afrikan groups are based on matrilineal ancestral lines, this is how they retained their culture, wealth, clan systems and family occupations. The Akan retained their Afrikan originated and centred culture and religion by the correlating based on ancestry and by migrating and fighting outside influence. But the current inhabitants of parts of Khanit, the Nubians (not an Afrikan name), have not fully preserved it. Ancestry and past interactions with other groups explain why.

Ancient Nubians

khanitu1  2-nubians  nubiancattleherderst

Some modern Nubians

Aswan, Egypt - 0132wedding9

Other modern Nubians

90710110110297534147aeec6b3-6ec1-4070-9196-23604f19c5fd

Modern Akans

king_asantehene_osei_tutu_ii_of_ashanti-asanteman

akan

Many Afrikans have now been confused by mulatto leadership, most people in Sudan are not mulattoes, but the leadership, installed by Eurasian conquerors has spent a lot of time brainwashing people.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/jun/10/sudan-identity-crisis-north-south

Not even the corrupted Abrahamic religions can defy this, they all claim their religion by the ‘God’ of their ancestor; Abraham. Abrahamic religions, in the fictitious ‘history’ recorded, fought with other tribes who had their own Gods and Goddesses, whom they claimed was the deities of their ancestors, this is how religion was formed, most religions are a tool, made by cultures of groups of people.

The history of the idea of race been promoted is fictional and made up is not even based on the history of humans. Liberal liars have tried to claim that the idea of race was made up by Europeans in the 1500’s in relation to racism (which is the use of race to build power relations). There was some attempt to organise the world’s races in the past, the Greeks and Romans, the Chinese, the Islamic world all had terms for races they often encountered different from them and their shared collective race.* The problem was these people had no knowledge of genetics and no knowledge of the entire planet and all groups of humans, once this occurred, via European colonialism, race was extended and applied everywhere, but unfortunately under European conciousness, they manipulated the meaning for their own devious agenda. One of the most obvious lies was the classing of all people with similar skin colour, namely, darker, melanated ones, as the same, calling American Indians Indians due to skin colour, calling Melanesians Negritos (little negroes) due to colour and facial features and also calling Europeans a separate race due to prevalence of albinistic traits.

‘Prior to the modern systematic era of biology humans did attempt to classify themselves. Generally they looked at a few informative features. For example the Chinese referred to both South and Southeast Asians as “black,” not because they thought they were African, but because they had brown or dark brown skins. Similarly, Arab ethnographers differentiated between ruddy peoples to the north, black ones to the south, and black ones to the east (Indians). And so on. This is almost certainly an elaboration of our innate cognitive ‘folk biology.’ By this, I mean that we as humans tend to classify organisms. Why this is adaptive is trivially obvious. When humans meet new organisms which resemble those which they have familiarity with prior, they simply reformulate the novel creatures as variants of the familiar ones. For example the Tasmanian Tiger was no tiger. It was not even a placental mammal. But through convergent evolution it resembled placental carnivores. Analogously, when Europeans first met the straight haired brown skinned native peoples of the New World they termed them “Indians,” a straight haired brown skinned population of the Old World. When they met the very dark and kinky haired peoples of the western Pacific they assumed they were some relation to Africans, and these became “Melanesians” (which means “black islanders”).’

Why race as a biological construct matters

‘The term “Ethiopia” was first used by Ancient Greek writers in reference to the east-central African kingdom that they believed to be not only culturally and ethnically linked to ancient “Egypt” (Kemet), but the source of such civilization as well. Contrary to popular belief, the term was not exclusive to the landlocked modern country of Ethiopia. According to early Greek writers, Ethiopia was an empire originally situated between Ta-Seti in Lower Kemet and the confluence of the White and Blue Niles. Centuries later, however, the name became synonymous with a much larger region that included the present-day countries of South Sudan, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Djibouti, Somalia, Kenya, Uganda, Central African Republic, Chad, etc.

Ethiopia is the English transliteration of the Greek word “Αιθιοπα” (or Aithiopia) which originates from the Greek word “Αιθιοψ” or “aithiops” which literally means “charred or burnt.” “Aithiops” is in fact composed of “αιθιω” (meaning “I burn”) and “ωψ” (meaning face or complexion).

Prior to Greek history, Ethiopia was known as “Kush” by the ancient “Egyptians.” The Buhen stela (housed in the Florence Museum), which dates from the reign of Sety I (1294-1279 BC), refers to this region as “Kas” and “Kash.” Kush is also mentioned as “KSH” in other texts dated between 1550 – 1069 BC.’

Ancient Greeks use of Ethiopia to mean dark skinned people, namely Afrikans but occasionally Indians too. The term was based in biological reality, albeit without the understanding of genetics, it wasn’t just randomly made up and edited as people went along.

http://www.taneter.org/ethiopia.html

IMA’s have tried to change the facts on race to try to make race as vague as they have tried to make gender, they understand that identity matters, biology goes deep into identity. The falsities propagated by the Liberal European Internationalist is about power over others consciousness and identity, it is not about scientific facts on race.

‘This changed over the centuries, and after 1800 the age of European supremacy and the rise of systematic science produced the sort of racial nationalism which serves as the backdrop to our understanding of race more generally. Whereas the pre-modern folk biological taxonomies were coarse, but generally accurate up to a point, the age of white supremacy produced a somewhat schizophrenic science of precision and exaggeration.’

Science is not about opinions. Be warned much of the IMA establishment is trying to use ‘science’ and ‘scientists’ in much the same manner as they did with ‘Christianity’ and ‘the clergy’ in the past. They made up stuff that had nothing to do with the Bible or even interpreting it, then use the legitimacy of the clergy in ordinary peoples’ minds to lie to them, as clergymen preaching about a book most couldn’t read. The scientists makes up theories, finds little to no evidence of it, but lies about it and the masses believe them as ‘scientists’ and most of the papers from studies are unavailable to the general public. It’s all politics.

*Have you ever wondered, how it is that these non-Afrikan groups have records still kept on racial differences from their own viewpoint, but the Ancient Kamit and Khanit records barely exist? They have been systematically destroyed, concealed or misconstrued by IMA’s and mulattoes in Northeast Afrika, lets, hope ancient Afrikans in other parts of Afrika and the Middle East have documentation still around, for the sake of Afrikan continuity.

‘An African / Black person is a person who is clearly a “close” descendant of people from East Africa, a region comprised of countries now known as Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda. Their color variation ranges from bronze, dark reddish-brown, dark or nut brown, dark-chocolate color plus “peppercorn” hair.’

https://acbnj.wordpress.com/about-3/acbn-mission-statement/

Advertisements

One comment

  1. Kushite Prince · April 2, 2016

    “The history of the idea of race been promoted is fictional and made up is not even based on the history of humans. Liberal liars have tried to claim that the idea of race was made up by Europeans in the 1500’s in relation to racism (which is the use of race to build power relations). There was some attempt to organise the world’s races in the past, the Greeks and Romans, the Chinese, the Islamic world all had terms for races they encountered different from them and their shared collective race.* The problem was these people had no knowledge of genetics and no knowledge of the entire planet and all groups of humans, once this occurred, via European colonialism, race was extended and applied everywhere, but unfortunately under European conciousness, they manipulated the meaning for their own devious agenda. One of the most obvious lies was the classing of all people with similar skin colour, namely, darker, melanated ones, as the same, calling American Indians Indians due to skin colour, calling Melanesians Negritos (little negroes) due to colour and facial features and also calling Europeans a separate race due to prevalence of albinistic traits.”
    Great post! Very informative post!

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s