>>Now you have the indigenous people are
>>still there but marginalized out of the power structure. I
>>pointed to Zewari’s post to say there are still Africans in
>>the region today.

>Then why were you arguing that the populations there now aren't the >original populations? Seems contradictory.

The argument is: The people who are in the region today that are called jews and arabs as shown on news casts and such, olive tone skin soft curly to straight hair, are not the original population of the area.

>>They stretched from the Levant out east toward Pakistan and
>>Afghanistan area and north into Asia Minor. Persia made it to
>>parts of Greece.

>OK, but keep in mind those empires conquered Afghanistan and >Pakistan, not the other way around, so Afghans and Punjabis >weren't moving into the Levant as conquerers and setting up shop >there.

You do realize Iranians consider themselves descended from Persians while Iraqis don’t? In what region did the Assyrian empire begin? Or the Persian? Did the Persian empire sprout up from within the Babylonian empire?

>>Like you said it is unlikely that they breed the indigenous
>>peoples out of existence. So this leaves a possibility that
>>jesus was born of the indigenous population of the area who
>>were are African.

>Whoa - where are you getting the indigenous population being African from?

40th what are you doing man? I thought you were above this kind of stuff. The title of the post is: "Why Can't People Accept that Jesus was African?" African meaning black like the people of the continent Africa.

>> As far as the chart show very little
>>intermixing of genes, which you point to as scientific proof.
>>That can explained where the indigenous peoples allowed others
>>to practice their ways and traditions but not intermarry. Now
>>as time goes by those in power make the rules. Turn a
>>negative into a positive. It is we who do not intermarry with
>>them (meaning the indigenous).

>But then there would be 2 seperate and distinct populations left in >the region, just like the Ashkenazis being seperate from North >Europeans. But the study shows the opposite, that the populations >there are all closely related.

This study does not show the opposite. Did they sample ALL the people of these areas meaning black arabs, or just the folk who are assume indigenous to the area? The agenda of the study was to see if the people we know as Jews today are a product intermixing and conversion. Now if you go into the study under the assumption that the olive toned people of the region today would have been the people that the Jews of today would have intermixed with for conversion then there is a flaw in the study. Do you see what I’m saying? If you assume that people who look like Arafat are the people that would have been intermixed with when in reality they are all the same people who did not originate in the area then the study is flawed. It only shows that once there, religions and traditions co-opted, they interbred with their own and not the indigenous population. There are two separate and distinct populations. Look at where the lemba’s ended up. But the study doesn’t consider them indigenous to the area. Most likely the same attitude they took in relation to other black groups in the area. Again I point to Zewari’s post as mentioned before.

>>Seriously how long does it take to convince a people they are
>>something they truly are not? How many generations? How long
>>did it take to convince the Rawandans that they are two
>>separate tribes of people?

>But the Rwandans were the ones who were colonized; the Belgians >didn't go into Rwanda and start calling *themselves* two seperate >tribes of people.

The point I was making with this is the two separate tribe shit is made up. The people know it was made but look how ingrained it is in their psyche. This was done in less than 100 years. Compare that to a group of people claiming something that is not theirs for over a thousand years. Is it any truer? No. Do they believe its true? For the most part hell yes. Best believe that there are those in their ranks that know and hide the truth.

>>Supporting evidence in the maps provided showing the empires
>>that occupied the area in the centuries leading up to the time
>>of jesus’s birth.

>That doesn't prove anything about populations migrating.

It doesn’t disprove either which is the point. What it does prove is room to doubt. How many people can tell the difference between an Iranian, Iraqi, Lebanese, Saudi Arabian, Palestinian, Turk, Afghani, and Kuwaiti, just by looking at them? I can’t. That doesn’t mean that there aren’t those who can, but that covers a wide area and thee all look similar. Someone is moving from somewhere. The question is from where?

>No it's not. And it's not a "seperation", it just highlights a >population cluster. As I said it is a sliding scale, but there are >still distinct clusters nonetheless.

>>http://www.skytopia.com/project/illusion/illusion.html see
>>the “checker shadow illusion”. The circles in the chart are
>>not to that extreme but creates the illusion all the same.

>I'm sorry, but that is ridiculous. It's just a circle, taking it >away doesn't do anything to disprove the population cluster.

It’s not ridiculous and it’s not just a circle. It’s marketing, advertising, it’s a manipulation of perception.

>>We both agree that according to the charts the Greeks and
>>Turks are close genetically. Why is not possible that the
>>modern day Arabs did not come from the Asia Minor area?
>>Taking into account that once there, adopted the traditions of
>>the indigenous peoples and for centuries breeding only with
>>those who follow those traditions.

>Because besides the fact that there is zero historical or >archeological evidence which even hints at this, if it were true >then the Saudis would be closer to the Turks on that chart than to >the Ashkenazi Jews, Syrians, Palestinians and Lebanese.

http://www.country-studies.com/saudi-arabia/diversity-and-social-stratification.html

The territory that in 1992 constituted the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia consisted of four distinct regions and diverse populations. Each region has sustained some measure of nomadic and seminomadic population: as recently as 1950, at least one-half the total population of the kingdom was estimated to be nomadic.

This I took from the above link starting at the second sentence. Could that explain it?

Another angle that is not being looked at is the Hebrews being nomadic for a period of time as well. After being enslaved in Egypt for hundreds of years. Mosheh leading the Hebrews out of Egypt, after living in the palace of Egyptian Pharaoh as his grandson, to Canaan where they established the Jewish state. Now here come the historic references for invasion that you seek. The Assyrians invade Judah around 701 B.C. The Assyrians are from the Asia Minor area (present day Turkey) and Syria. From what I’ve read it seems that it was common practice for conquering people to adopt the religions and gods of those conquered.

>>Not enough German, Austrian, and Russian converts to affect
>>the population.

>That still doesn't explain why they're closer to the Greeks

Sure it does. What helps to support it is the Persian and Macedonian empires. The Persian reaching Greece and the Macedonia originating in Greece. How does one get from Persia to Greece and Greece to Persia? Answer: Turkey also known at Asia Minor.

>>Did you see the pictures on
>>the web site? Who do you think more closely resembles the
>>description of skin like burnt brass and hair like lambs wool?
>> The Lembas or todays jews? From that description what group
>>would you say jesus was descended from?

>So you are gonna base an empirical assessment of his ethnicity on a >second-hand at best anecdotal description? And what does that >description prove anyway? Israel's a desert climate and JC walked >around in sandals all day - how's he NOT gonna have feet like >burnt brass?

My grandfather worked construction jobs, he'd work outside all day in the summer with his shirt off and when he'd come home my mom said his back looked like bronze... and he was Irish, straight from the bog. Give him a Jewish afro for the hair like wool, and I guess he could've fit that description of Jesus too. Which is funny, cuz he was whiter than Jim Caviezel.

Are you serious?

First off bronze is not BURNT brass. Secondly, Jewish afro?? What? Like Gene Wilder’s? Have you ever touched wool? That stuff is think and course. Sweaters made from the stuff scratch and itch the skin. I have yet to see a pale jew or arab with tight curled hair that water beads on. Now my tight wooly fro is hair of a different texture.

>>They know how they got to where they are
>>and are not going to let it happen to them. We’s here now and
>>we’s here to stay.

>Yeah, they've been really fortunate with the pogroms and holocausts >and all that.

Again you disappoint.


---------------------

"...you cats are undercover like GAY rappers dealing with MYSTERY." -Talib Kweli This means you, from Reflection Eternal

"I don't blame Tiger Woods, but I overstand the mental poison that's even worse than drugs" -nas poison