Frank Rizzo mural at 9th and Montrose Streets in the Italian Market, Philadelphia
Posted on 08/22/2012 7:05:20 AM PDT by Renfield
Evidence of African, Arabian, south-east Asian and Siberian ancestry in Scotland, says author of book tracing genetic journey
A large scale study of Scottish people's DNA is threatening to "rewrite the nation's history", according to author Alistair Moffat.
Scotland, he told the Edinburgh international book festival, despite a long-held belief that its ethnic make-up was largely Scots, Celtic, Viking and Irish, was in fact "one of the most diverse nations on earth".
"The explanation is simple. We are a people on the edge of beyond; on the end of a massive continent. Peoples were migrating northwest; and they couldn't get any further. We have collected them."....
(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...
They stated in the article that there were “Scots, Celtic, Viking and Irish” in Scotland. Th Irish are Gaelic Scots who happen to be Celtic, and there are Gaelic Scots in Scotland who came from Ireland who are the same race. There are also Pict's in Scotland who are Celts as well.
Then you have the Norse in the north of Scotland who also trace there ancestry to the Celts.
Whoever wrote this article didn't do there homework.
As was posted above the Celtic people stretched from Ireland to as far away as the steppes of Russia and from Asia Minor (Turkey) to Norway. They are one of the oldest known races in the world.
You go back 8,500 years ago there was even more land since the ocean had not reached its preent level, so they could have been driving some early model SUVs into the region.
A lesson ~ up until recent times the Sa'ami were considered to be an Asian people who'd moved West. They are now known through careful examination of their DNA to be a Western European people who'd moved North so long ago they'd lost contact with Western Europe ~ and had been brought back into permanent contact about 1,000 years ago.
They look different because they retained more of the facial characteristics of their Cro-Magnon ancestors than did other Europeans.
Western Europeans, at the same time, were imagined to have been a Black Sea population that gradually repopulated Europe after the Ice Age. DNA examination reveals that they are actually Western Europeans who stayed in place and spread out from roughly the Franco-Spanish border. There's a later admixture of Middle Eastern agriculturalists in the mix ~
So, one might ask, where did the Western Europeans come from in the first place ~ and the answer is Western Central Asia where they were relatively safe during the last Interstadial (short duration of warm climate during a period of otherwise intense glaciation). They arrived there from the Middle East during an earlier Interstadial, and they arrived in the Middle East during an even earlier Interstadial ~ and may have even occupied a WET Arabian peninsula for a good long time before that.
They are, as it turns out, derived from the same ancestry as most Middle Eastern and East Asian peoples!
However, due to isolation and climate change they simply turned out to look a bit different, and when we get to the Sa'ami to actually BE a bit different since their ancestors' environment was so cold. You don't just personally adapt to the Arctic ~ you must change the way your heart beats and how your liver functions, and how you see in the dark or sleep in the daytime. It's good to have a longer torso and shorter limbs. Might be smart to grow a bigger brain too, and have some missing teeth so you can tear into raw meat and fish without much effort. Blue blindness and extra red receptors help as well.
All of that shows up in the DNA as well.
British historians thought that to be ridiculous until DNA demonstrated that the Irish were genetically identical to Basque people in Spain.
More recent DNA study reveals that the Brits themselves are genetically identical to the Irish, and not the Saxons.
They are reeling under the assault. We have them on the run now.
What I want to know is which of those exogeneous peoples brought in the skirts?
I reckon it's an apparatus of tearing down cultural tradition in order to impose another; easier to disclaim their values and demoralize them in this way. Even here, though, the "revaluations" are scantly meaningful.
Frank Rizzo mural at 9th and Montrose Streets in the Italian Market, Philadelphia
Hmm ~ 150 years back we had folks in America who could tell you their membership in hundreds of African tribes. That’s pretty multi-culti.
All of them.
Skirts are easy to make and easy to wear. You can relieve yourself without disrobing and one size fits most.
However once horse back riding arrived things changed and breeches were born. More guys rode then girls so breeches became a "mans clothes" and skirts became "girls clothes".
Where the weather was hot or there was not a lot of long distance horse back riding skirts stuck around long enough to move into the category of "native dress" and survived.
It's the great-great-great grandfathers one should be concerned with.
Ping and hello! You’ll like this thread.
I think “What....Mr Llewellyn?” is one of the funniest lines ever spoken on television. I’m still laughing at that one 37 years later.
Well, I wish more of the people "of color" would recognize that. There were virulent animosities and takeovers and enslavements among many races of peoples with white skin. They are not the only ones.
Whenever I hear people dissing English as the official language of the U.S., I groan. The English oppressed the Scots, Irish and Welsh for centuries; and English is not the racially original language of most of the "white" people in the U.S. But we need a common language so as to not end up constantly fighting like Quebec. English is as good as any. Fewer tenses than Latin-based languages; fewer weird diacritical marks.
If you look at the A/0 blood type ratio about 50%.
One should never call a kilt a "skirt", of course. A dress, now, I guess that'd be OK... ;-)
Basque people and hsitory are fascinating and too ltttle explored here. And elsewhere, ftm.
But it is the original language of the white people who originally settled the USA and founded the original 13 colonies, and then wrote the Declaration of Independence, fought the Revolutionary War and wrote the Articles of Confederation and then the US Constitution.
No point in pretending that the heritage of the USA is not overwhelmingly English. The white folks were 90% English during the revolution.
I certainly understand your post; however, I don’t believe you understood mine.
Ping!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.