Were the first people in america black or indian

[Benefited]

Just follow the migration trail. It's obvious the first native NA were from the beringia area.

What lineage are current south Americans. Majority beringians , nomadic euros and nomadic Africans interbreeding?

Eurasians have been said to have been mixing heavy with African tribes like the Khoisans,so that isn't saying much. This doesn't prove people who looked African/black didn't exist among native americans. We still don't know if we crossed the Bering Strait first or not,as there may have been more than one method and and other tribes completely who got here first through Australia before those so called NA.

 

[™BlackPearl The Empress™]

Both breh. There were many types of people here. Mostly "Asians" on the West and "Blacks" in the East & South. The mistake people make is really believing that this was some untouched land were people were not in contact with the rest of the world. It was a thriving continent with many different people and cultures who participated in trade around the world.

Ya'll wanna talking about bones? 90% of the population was murdered. Where are all their bones? You don't need ancient bones. Find the 1500 y/o bones of millions of people that should be all over this country. Nah we don't wanna do that. They wanna pull up the oldest shyt they can find and that is suppose to prove that "Black" people weren't here? Come on now.:funny:

 

[Sankofa Alwayz]

The passionate energy that some of y'all spend here :mjwonkalol:

That smilie

 

[Sankofa Alwayz]

Both breh. There were many types of people here. Mostly "Asians" on the West and "Blacks" in the East & South. The mistake people make is really believing that this was some untouched land were people were not in contact with the rest of the world. It was a thriving continent with many different people and cultures who participated in trade around the world.

Ya'll wanna talking about bones? 90% of the population was murdered. Where are all their bones? You don't need ancient bones. Find the 1500 y/o bones of millions of people that should be all over this country. Nah we don't wanna do that. They wanna pull up the oldest shyt they can find and that is suppose to prove that "Black" people weren't here? Come on now.:funny:

Facts. /thread

 

[™BlackPearl The Empress™]

Facts. /thread

People wanna challenge one piece of information but don't realize you have to throw out the whole paradigm.

If they'd stop with the whole "who was here first" BS they would gain more prospective. "Black" people don't need to have been her 100s of thousands of years ago to have been when WP came.

They could have easily have settled, migrated and populated here over hundreds or thousands of years just like WP have done in America.

I believe I know what actually happened but that's another thread.

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

We hold the same position it sounds like,your perception is just misguided much like the Europeans was.

Says the guy using the 'One-Drop' Rule, established by Europeans, to establish 'Blackness'..........
​

Do you really believe there were not people among the so called native americans who looked black/african?

What someone looks like is NO indication of their ethnicity as physical features are not unique to distinguish one group of human beings from all others. ALL of your posts make that point perfectly clear.
​

When we have picture evidence that shows otherwise,eyewitness descriptions that say different?

We don't have 'picture evidence'. We have a bunch of drawings based on second-hand DESCRIPTIONS, not eyewitnesses. By your logic, we should believe Cthulhu exists because someone drew it.


​

 

[BmoreGorilla]

People wanna challenge one piece of information but don't realize you have to throw out the whole paradigm.

If they'd stop with the whole "who was here first" BS they would gain more prospective. "Black" people don't need to have been her 100s of thousands of years ago to have been when WP came.

They could have easily have settled, migrated and populated here over hundreds or thousands of years just like WP have done in America.

I believe I know what actually happened but that's another thread.

It’s crazy to me with these threads. It’s like they truly wanna believe that the white man accomplished so much and we accomplished so little. And they always come with the “y’all wanna erase your history” shyt like the white man didn’t create the narrative in the first place

 

[010101]

Asians are melanated and NOT Black.

It's an environmental adaptation and not an indication of ethnicity.

Polar bears have dark skin.

​

did i equate melanated to black¿

populations start off melanated then become lighter

you ever see a population of pale individuals become more melanated¿

how is the skin color of polar bears relevant¿

*

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

did i equate melanated to black¿

No, everyone arguing against me do, though.
​

how is the skin color of polar bears relevant¿

Those arguing against me believe certain physical features = Black, meanwhile, the skin color (and other physical features) of polar bears indicate that dark skin is JUST an environmental adaptation...

​

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

It’s crazy to me with these threads. It’s like they truly wanna believe that the white man accomplished so much and we accomplished so little. And they always come with the “y’all wanna erase your history” shyt like the white man didn’t create the narrative in the first place

Our stance is this: We don't need to destroy/steal another culture's history to make ours important to the rest of the world.

Our culture and history is fantastic by it's own merits and we should be proud of what we've accomplished despite what 'White' people did to us.

By doing to other cultures what 'Whites' did to us, that only shows we're not better than they are.....which couldn't be further from the truth.​

 

[™BlackPearl The Empress™]

It’s crazy to me with these threads. It’s like they truly wanna believe that the white man accomplished so much and we accomplished so little. And they always come with the “y’all wanna erase your history” shyt like the white man didn’t create the narrative in the first place

Right. It's amazing how people really believe half the planet were savages who needed WP to civilize them. Then they will try to argue you down about who were the correct "savages." Not knowing that they look like a dummy for believing the shyt in the first place.

 

[™BlackPearl The Empress™]

Our stance is this: We don't need to destroy/steal another culture's history to make ours important to the rest of the world.

Our culture and history is fantastic by it's own merits and we should be proud of what we've accomplished despite what 'White' people did to us.

By doing to other cultures what 'Whites' did to us, that only shows we're not better than they are.....which couldn't be further from the truth.​

Statements like this are so frustrating but I don't blame you because there is so much misinformation out there. Half the people who talk about this don't even know wtf they are taking about frfr.

I believe the truth to be that we migrated /settled here some thousands of years ago. Not long enough for our DNA to differ from our cousins across the pond but long enough for us to develop shoveled teeth.

A huge % of AA have shoveled teeth. I do. Look it up. Shoveled teeth is an Asian characteristic. It is not found in Africans nor Europeans. So how did a population of Africans get an Asian characteristic when we are suppose to be straight out of Africa?

I believe that early settlers probably breed with the Asians that were here. A practice that probably died out once more settlers came and lands/territories were established which is why AA have such little recent Asian DNA but carry this Asian characteristic.

I say all that to say that we are not "Native Americans" in the most popular sense of the word. We are natives that have roots in Africa. This takes nothing away from us, it doesn't steal anyone elses history nor does it means we deny who you we are. If anything it add values, enriches our history and connects the dots and fills in missing gaps in history for us as a people.

PS Some Africans were brought to the Americas but not in the millions and millions as we've been told. Logistically that story doesn't even make sense but that is another discussion.

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

Statements like this are so frustrating but I don't blame you because there is so much misinformation out there. Half the people who talk about this don't even know wtf they are taking about frfr.

I DO know what I'm talking about, though.
​

I believe the truth to be that we migrated /settled here some thousands of years ago. Not long enough for our DNA to differ from our cousins across the pond but long enough for us to develop shoveled teeth.

We didn't settle here thousands of years ago. Shoveled teeth are just an environmental adaptation.....like straight hair and large nostrils. Matter of fact, shoveled teeth are a mutation that helped Asians survive from Siberia to Alaska. It is found in 40% of Asians due to 2 alleles in the EDAR gene which came into existence 40,000 years ago in China and spread throughout Native American populations 20,000 years ago. The population of Africans got that characteristic due to simple genetic expression from interbreeding with the Native populations here and from the Middle East.....

Shovel-shaped incisors and associated invagination in some Asian and African populations. - PubMed - NCBI
​

A huge % of AA have shoveled teeth. I do. Look it up. Shoveled teeth is an Asian characteristic. It is not found in Africans nor Europeans. So how did a population of Africans get an Asian characteristic when we are suppose to be straight out of Africa?

A huge percentage of AA's have that characteristic due to breeding with the Native American (Asian), and Middle Eastern populations. That is the key that is missing. West African nations had a rather large influx of genes from the Middle East due to the Islamic Conquests in the 8th Century. That characteristic helped those with it to survive here and spread it to their offspring. It IS found, rarely, in African populations.
​

I believe that early settlers probably breed with the Asians that were here. A practice that probably died out once more settlers came and lands/territories were established which is why AA have such little recent Asian DNA but carry this Asian characteristic.

No argument there.​

I say all that to say that we are not "Native Americans" in the most popular sense of the word. We are natives that have roots in Africa. This takes nothing away from us, it doesn't steal anyone elses history nor does it means we deny who you we are. If anything it add values, enriches our history and connects the dots and fills in missing gaps in history for us as a people.

That's fine, but Black people were not here until the 16th Century CE. Brown people were. ALL Black people are Brown people, but not all Brown people are Black. Australian aborigines, for example, are NOT Black. Neither are the peoples of the Andaman Islands. Black is a cultural assignation and has little to do with skin shade which is NO indication of ethnicity as it is not unique. 'Filling in the gaps/connecting the dots' in OUR history doesn't mean we have to steal another culture's which is what this entire argument amounts to, no matter how much 'value' it adds. It decreases us as a people by showing that we're no better than our oppressors.
​

PS Some Africans were brought to the Americas but not in the millions and millions as we've been told. Logistically that story doesn't even make sense but that is another discussion.

And this is where you are absolutely wrong as there are records of the 'cargoes' carried from Africa to the colonies here in the Americas that refute that entire assertion. Those records were used to create this database (and others)........

Estimates

This link provides background on how the database was created.....

History
​

 

[™BlackPearl The Empress™]

I DO know what I'm talking about, though.
​

We didn't settle here thousands of years ago. Shoveled teeth are just an environmental adaptation.....like straight hair and large nostrils. Matter of fact, shoveled teeth are a mutation that helped Asians survive from Siberia to Alaska. It is found in 40% of Asians due to 2 alleles in the EDAR gene which came into existence 40,000 years ago in China and spread throughout Native American populations 20,000 years ago. The population of Africans got that characteristic due to simple genetic expression from interbreeding with the Native populations here and from the Middle East.....

Shovel-shaped incisors and associated invagination in some Asian and African populations. - PubMed - NCBI
​

A huge percentage of AA's have that characteristic due to breeding with the Native American (Asian), and Middle Eastern populations. That is the key that is missing. West African nations had a rather large influx of genes from the Middle East due to the Islamic Conquests in the 8th Century. That characteristic helped those with it to survive here and spread it to their offspring. It IS found, rarely, in African populations.
​

No argument there.​

That's fine, but Black people were not here until the 16th Century CE. Brown people were. ALL Black people are Brown people, but not all Brown people are Black. Australian aborigines, for example, are NOT Black. Neither are the peoples of the Andaman Islands. Black is a cultural assignation and has little to do with skin shade which is NO indication of ethnicity as it is not unique. 'Filling in the gaps/connecting the dots' in OUR history doesn't mean we have to steal another culture's which is what this entire argument amounts to, no matter how much 'value' it adds. It decreases us as a people by showing that we're no better than our oppressors.
​

​

And this is where you are absolutely wrong as there are records of the 'cargoes' carried from Africa to the colonies here in the Americas that refute that entire assertion. Those records were used to create this database (and others)........

Estimates

This link provides background on how the database was created.....

History
​

Most AA have very little "Native American"/ Asian DNA. I only have 2%. Even the "Black" Cherokees had little to no "NA" DNA which is why they were kicked out the nation.

If there was heavy mixing as you say it would show up heavily as it does in Dominicans, Puerto Ricians and other "Black" people of diaspora. But it doesn't. Most AA are just White & Black. Yet we still have an Asian characteristic that has nothing to do with adaptation. I actually addressed this in the post you quoted but that is the way these conversations go. You say something but the other person ignores you because they are more interested in being right than having an actual conversation.


I will read and respond to the rest later when I get a chance. I kinda been back and forth on this topic so many times with people repeating the same things over and over. It's exhausting and pointless. But I will address the rest when I can.

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

If there was heavy mixing as you say

I didn't say that at all, but this sheds some light on the subject....

FSI | SPICE - The Spread of Islam in West Africa: Containment, Mixing, and Reform from the Eighth to the Twentieth Century​