₦airaland Forum

magicjack:
from what youve said, all of us originated from adam n eve, does that then make all of us are jews or whatever race adam was?

Depends on what you are looking for when you take the genetic test. If you want us to trace you back to your earliest Ancestor, they can do that as well

viscerion:
ill ask a simple question, no dodging or avoiding the question just answer. Are Urhobos and Isokos of the same ethnic group?

Answer to your question Yes and no

Yes, depending on your definition of what constitutes ethnicity.

NO, depending on your definition or what constitutes ethnicity.

If you want I can elaborate but you said i should just answer the question.

magicjack:
my family n i went for DNA test this morning, and there is 0% igbo in our blood. Problem Solved!

Like RedboneSmith say una get fast test turn around for your side. Make you post result make we confirm na!

viscerion:
dis is my problem with many Igbos, acting as if they are the only ones who know evritin, I know the diff btw a dialect of a language and a language itself and it does not apply to my points at all. Ibibio and Annang are not diff dialects of same tribe, they are different tribes and each has its own diff dialects, ikwerre sef has diff dialects so it cant be a dialect of igbo.

AGAIN, THE SAME LANGUAGE DOES NOT AUTOMATICALLY MEAN THE SAME TRIBE, if you dont know this, its cuz ure not exposed to diff tribes, thoes from the SS have a good understanding of what im taking about

You are playing semantics here with the definitions of tribe, ethnic group, dialect and language.

If two groups in close proximity to each other speak a similar language this correlates with a similar genetic origin. Period

Clan names, tribes etc are fluid and can change depending on situations. Therefore Ikwerre may has started off within the igbo clan or group and diverged at a certain period creating a distinct dialect that later fits into what can be construed as a language of its own.

The Bantu tribes of South Africa are a clear example of this. Almost every ethnic group in that country are originated from the same stock of people however through time,new clans, tribes and ethnic groups have surfaced. The Zulu, Ndebele, Swati, Xhosa, are all distinct groups of people but who's languages are somwhat mutually understandable amongst them. They originate from a common ancestor and are referred as Nguni because of this.

THEREFORE SIMILAR LANGUAGE CORRELATES TO SIMILAR ORIGINS most of the time.

Stop endless and senseless socio political arguments.

bigfrancis21:
Are you ready to submit to a DNA test to confirm your Igbo ancestry? I'm willing to pay for it.

lol

Viscerion knows how to find the answer to what he is looking for, being angry about Igbo saying this or that is besides the point. The truth of your origins is in your DNA. If a Yoruba man takes DNA test he will confirm who he is, IF Hausa man take test, he will confirm, if Zulu man take test he will confirm, If half caste take test him self go confirm.

We are waiting on Ikwerre people, if you take the test and you are not of the IGbo stock then problem solved, Shikena!

come and post the results on Nairaland for us to see.

Otherwise every other arguement postulated regarding this matter is noise making

viscerion:
exactly we need a DNA test to know if ikwerre truly came from igbo or not, until then no one can be sure

why dont the people from that area fund the testing, are they afraid of what they wiil find?

KingSango:
And what would be the purpose of Africans fabricating history?

Every nation or peoples embelish their origins because of ego or etho centrism. That's Human nature. A man can lie about the number of children he has simply to boost his ego. If you test all those kids and find out he is only the father to 10 out of 20 of them, that is "evidence"

KingSango:
There is no motivation for the people who established civilization and settled on every land on Earth before other races to fabricate history. No, the only people who fabricate are those who didn't come first, whose history is short, and whose civilization is but a mere copy of the African.

I don't know if the above even makes sense. If African people came first, isn't it African people who populated the word then then "turned" into all these other races through a process, therefore the population outside of Africa are simply adapted version of the original source group, they are not a different "race" or "group" of people.

KingSango:
You are too narcissistic to speak with and I've spoken to you before and ran into the same issue. There's is no common ground with Biblical believers who are just basically Catholics. If you believe in that Bible you are just a Catholic no more!

Asking for evidence which is verifiable and not merely relying on heresay is not narcissitic its scientific.

I am neither a Catholic nor do I base my information on questions in reference to Biblical literature

KingSango:
There are two people who mess up this Earth, Black people and White people. Blacks are the largest group of Christians on Earth and the Whites run the Catholic Church and the Jewish side. The Arabs are just Whites. Black and White Freemasons keep all the lies going. They won't allow true history to be told because they only want it shared in their Masonic lodges. All the homosexuality spreading is Blacks and Whites! All the sodomite cults, Blacks and Whites. And I'm even finding it shocking how many Blacks are outright pedophiles, not as bad as the Whites yet in still there are many Black pedophiles. Blacks tricking other Blacks into slavery by promising them jobs overseas only to sell them over to the Arabs for slavery.

Conspriacy theories, absolutely unverifiable therefore is heresay or opinion.

KingSango:
The Chinese gave Africa 60 billion dollars no interest, no pay back date. When have any of you Pan Africans, Hebrews, Egyptian wanna bes, Black Nationalists, African Union, and Pan Yoruba called for an economic front to fix the issues of the African world? None of that. You want to argue about histories you didn't live. You didn't build any Pyramids the Ancestors did. And you are a long, long, long way from being anything close to their Supreme Culture.

?Did you take your Haloperidol shots today?

PS, I do not say people are not free to self determine or self actualize only that this process be based on truth and facts and not on fabrications and denials

viscerion:
True, but its a big 'IF'

Viscerion, there is nothing "big" about the if at all. The fact is no one is truly ready to put this case to test or to rest because it is more advantageous to continue to use it for ethno-religious and socio-political agendas.

If you notice the so called 'arguements" that continue to ensue about this matter base their "facts" or evidence on oral traditions, cultural practices, affinities to certain deities and the likes, all of which are "subjective", can be constructed, misconstrued or fabricated. DNA however does not lie.

if a group of people from your village travel from uyo to Imo state, their children settle there, retain their traditional akwa ibom names with variations and speak a language that sounds like a hybrid of Igbo and Ibibio and then all of a sudden down the line claim they originated from some town inside Imo state, DNA will prove without a doubt if tested that the group of people are related to you genetically and therefore are an offshoot of your people regardless of the changes in culture, language or traditions, period.

viscerion:
true! but what makes igbos so sure that from genetic results, ikwerre n its likes will b closer to igbo than any other groups. for all we know of their history (n dahs very little given many diff versions, but igbo pepo only want to believe d version dat says they come from nkwerre) is it not possible they may b edo or ijaw who picked up igbo language n culture?

1. Language is usually a strong indicator of origins or close ties with a neighbour group that speaks a similar language. The lexicon, grammar and alphabetic formations of the Igboid languages seem to point to the "igbo language" as the source language ergo the origins of the people. There is usually a linear relationship with languages that are similar to each other. The linguists that dubbed these languages as Igboid, did so using such logical reasoning.


2. Population Genetics usually correlates with the above linguistic theory as well, In other words if two groups in close proximity to each other speak a variant or similar language it is very likely they emanate from the same source population or one group diverged from the other. In this instance the source population "Igbo" are a larger ethnic group in the surrounding areas therefore it would be logical to infer that these 'igboid" groups emanated from that source population leaving the below possibilities outside of genetic testing to confirm this.



a. The igboid groups migrated out of the source or "core" population "Igbo", intermingling with a new group causing both a genetic and linguistic drift from the original source group to the new group creating a hybrid ethnic group ergo the divergence from the source language.

b. The migrating group still retained a majority of their genetic makeup and are therefore still genetically Igbo with of course a minute inflow of genes and language from the neighbouring group.

c. It is the other way round, smaller non Igbo groups migrating to Igbo areas adopting parts of their language and possibly a small inflow of genes from the Igbo groups but are genetically distinct from the Igbo.

These are the only logical The key to ending this tiring debate is quite simple. Take the DNA of a large group of these Igboid groups if their genetics tie significantly with the Igbo then it means that they without a doubt originate from this group even if they wish to self identify as something else.

DNA does not lie. People really don't want to end this issue because if they really did they could. Most prefer to politize the issue and argue in endless circles.


It is very possible that these groups of people may Igbo migrants that adopted certain words form their new or adjourning neighbours, it is also possible they are a hybrid group as a result of two source groups intermixing both genetics and language. It is also possible that the source group remained genetically the same and simply adopted words from neighbouring groups as well.

The linear relationship used by linguists to connect peoples of similar origins is what is in play here as many linguists categorized these languages as Igboid because it would be assumed that the source p following the used to connect peoples with similar languages in Africa usually

KingSango:
The DNA is a silent witness.

Afican royal families say they came from God Himself.

Anyone can fabricate stories of their origins. Where is the evidence.

DNA is evidence not heresay!

^^^^

Since you don't even know the building blocks of evolution or anything that has to do with genetics who anthropology I will be wasting my time.


I will leave you with one question which if you can explain coherently or logically we can continue

If Africans came from monkeys, did they come directly from monkeys to become humans or was it a process?

and if it was a process then how did that process come to be. If they came from God, by what process did they come to be.

Answering this question will pretty much explain your whole reasoning process.

HORRORIZON:
LOL. That's ridiculous. If that's your experience, then it's pretty obvious that you haven't spent much time around us. We say that ish all the time, especially when we want to make our point clear or express the severity of our words, and usually done in a very stern or sassy way.

The above correlates much more with typical AA diction and writting patterns, the poster on the other hand is still suspect

but don't let me divert away from the subject matter at hand eh!

Hati13:
Of the above listed, Aksumite, Zagwe, Gomma, Gumma and Jimma were Ethiopian civilizations. Solomonic/Abyssinia (not listed above though) was also an Ethiopian civilization. There were also many other Ethiopian civilizations like Punt, Damat, Ifat, Adal, Harla/Harar, Damot, etc....

During the peak of Aksumite empire, it was considered one of the 3 great power along Rome and Persia.

When you say Ethiopian civilizations, do you mean the "Ethiopians" in its current usage and geographical expression?

Moorish:
Well that’s cool but the moors were most successful

Moors actually had a civilization( art, architecture, garments, weapons, tech )

So you have a moorish civilization

I am also proud of the Kushitic civilization

The moors were more successful conquerors aided by the Islamic expansion period in the Magreb, therefore they are technically not an African civilization.

The Kushites in contrast originated inside Africa tried expansionist moves outside the continent

viscerion:
We are all hear to learn, but some group of people are strong headed and hellbent on deceiving others, so this is to prevent deception

To all yorubas, hausas, all northerners, and south southerners, the next time you enter an argument with an Igbo person on whether ikwerre, ukwuani, ika of delta are igbo? just give the igbo person these following points

1.) people of bonny in rivers are ijaw, yet they speak igbo. tribe is not by language
2.)urhobos and isokos of delta are like twins, yet they maintain their status as different tribes, go to warri and see
3.)Ibibio and efik of akwa ibom and cross river despite strong similarities maintain their status as different tribes, it is we outsiders that just grouped all of them as "calabar people"
4.) ikwerre people have as much similarities with ijaw as with igbo, come to rivers and see, ikwerre main dressing and dance like ijaws
5.) yorubas answer timi, ijaw people also bear timi does that make ijaws yoruba?
6.) though not confirmed, they are evidences that show ikwerre and ika of agbor MAY come from Edo, which may explain the name "rumuighoroya"
7.) Even Non Nigerians from togo, ghana e.t.c claim to be Nigerians if it will favour them jobs, admission, social benefits, e.t.c, after all GEJ an ijaw man gave himself azikiwe to get favour from igbos, so dont be surprise when famous ikwerre people all themselves igbo, same people will claim hausa if they can if it will favour them
8.)Ikwerre has different dialects, so ikwerre itself cannot be a dialect under igbo
9.) why is it only Igbo people that keep insisting that ikwerre and ika and ukwani of delta state are igbos, when even the ikwerre, ukwani people dont insist that

i could go on and on, dont be deceived, rumuighoroya meka we

I continue to find these arguments quite archaic and outside the realm of today's realities in identifying ethnic groups.

It is quite easy to find out if there is a linear correlation btw linguistic similarities and an ethno-genesis of a people.

All someone need do is conduct a large scale genetic study using samples from all these groups in question and compare contrast with other adjourning groups around them if the groups studied cluster genetically then there is conclusive evidence buttressed by the linguistic similarities that indeed the groups branched off or originated from the same source population somewhere in the near past.

The rest of all this gibberish simply has a political undertone to it.


This is the 21st century

Shikena!

HORRORIZON:
How so? I'm AA and she seems perfectly AA to me.

"Yes, based on Igbo culture is he obligated to the child even though I'm not an Igbo woman (from my knowledge). He hasn't been part of the pregnancy so far and refuses to speak to me period. Does Igbo culture condone that behavior towards me? Is his behavior normal?"

Her is an example of Nigerian grammar. Look at the bolded. I don't normally hear AA use this particular word in sentence formations.


The rest of her responses are filled with Nigerian type indiosyncrasy.

The poster is suspect

RedboneSmith:
It has always amused me when black people tried to argue that white people were 'half-human' because they [white people] have non-Sapiens admixture from the Neanderthals. Such people assume Africans are fully Homo sapiens. I always thought the gloating was premature; everyday archaeogenetics is digging up new information about our ancestors. And I knew sooner or later geneticists will find that WE too - the Africans - have non-Sapiens genetic contribution.

I mean, think about it: Africa was home to several early archaic humans and hominids, much much much more so than Europe. What is it that made us think we also didn't play some productive hanky-panky with them, the way early Europeans and early Asians did with the Neanderthals and the denisovans?

Well, we now have some new evidence that some West Africans carry mysterious genes from some yet to be identified hominid, possibly Homo heidelbergensis. Information is still scanty, but I am sure in years and decades to come, we will learn that we too are not 100% Homo sapiens, and this nonsense about Europeans being 'half-human' and we 'full-human' will cease.

https://www.iflscience.com/editors-blog/modernday-people-in-west-africa-possess-dna-from-an-unknown-ghost-hominin/

Its not fare fetched at all and I have always suspected that Europeans and Asians had some sort of introduction of another human species into their gene pool. it would make sense if all these "types' of humans were loitering around the continents as sapien wondered out of Africa.

We have the same behavior even today where as modern groups of people venture and encounter other groups there is a high probability of inter mixing with them. In the truest sense there are no pure humans rather racists or people who wish to push a particular narrative usually use the information they deem fit that fits that narrative without really exploring the entirety of the subject matter.

The San are for example some of the closest modern descendants of the earliest homo sapiens that moved around Africa. They display certain archaic traits and by traits I mean "body anatomy, phenotypical representations and genetics" even till today without a doubt as their ancestors had remained isolated for a long period of time.

scholes0:
Yes, peppercorn hair is natural. It is simply a variation of the Curly African hair type, but "Dada" hair grows out of the head inn more tightly curled clumps than the general populace.
It is more widespread among some African ethnic groups than others.

you are right. Southern African tribes have a variant of he pepper corn hair texture

Onechancearmy:
It is actually black people who have a problematic ancestry. Neanderthals actually had a larger brain than Homo Sapien. So when they interbred, the off spring between the Homo Sapiens and Neanderthals who are the present Europeans inherited the larger brain of their Neanderthal ancestors.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DbBEMJjX4AAwaOV.jpg

Homo Sapiens in Africa on the other hand intermarried with an ape like hominid creature with ape like features, hence the strong resemblance that the black man shares with the ape.

While it is true that Neanderthals had bigger brains than humans, studies have been done to show that there is no correlation with intelligence and the particular variations is brain size within human populations so drop that idea please

Hati13:
White ppl have greater Neanderthal admixture than any other ppl. Neanderthal were non-Homo Sapiens creatures. Indian ppl have also greater admixture with other non-Homo Sapien creatures. There are many ppl who have those admixture, but they are very less and they can as result be considered more Humane than White and Indian ppl.

This right up is very misleading.

1. Neanderthals are archaic "humans" not "creatures" therefore are able to breed with modern anatomical humans aka Homo sapiens.
2.The admixture of Neanderthal DNA is btw 2- 4% is populations that are non sub Saharan- what this simply means is that at some point there was interbreeding btw the two groups but the hybrid population gradually intro-gressed and continued as Homo sapiens.
3. There is also evidence that African homo sapiens also interbred with other archaic hominids and some groups in sub Saharan Africa have a small btw 1- 2% gene admixture with Homo heidelbergensis.

Please post coherent information

Nyu424:
So it's b.s. there's an unplanned pregnancy and I'm keeping it or b.s. that I'm mentioning it on the site. If insight can be given on a sad situation such as this one what's the issue? You mention nothing of his wrongdoing since he is actually Ibo and knows what his culture would think of it actions, but didn't have enough respect to be careful. By the way, he's told me once before that he had an abortion in his prior relationship, but only revealed that information after we had conceived. Maybe your bro should wrap up because my legs stayed closed before this snake entered my life.

poster, you grammar and they way to write is very indicative of Nigerian grammar.

You are suspect my dear

Can any one shed some light on the dispersion of Khoisan DNA within contemporary African ethnic groups today. The reason I am researching this issue has to do with arguments ensuing in South Africa today as regards the Land redistribution issue and how the Khoisan fit into this narrative.

There is contention that they are the first peoples of Southern Africa and therefore are the rightful owners or custodians of the land in Africa vs the Bantu who are considered recent migrants.

but do they still exist today as a uniform group or have most of them been incorporated into other ethnic groups i.e Bantu and the coloreds of the cape

What are you thoughts, contributions.?

Thanks.

Can any one shed some light on the dispersion of Khoisan DNA within contemporary African ethnic groups today. The reason I am researching this issue has to do with arguments ensuing in South Africa today as regards the Land redistribution issue and how the Khoisan fit into this narrative.

There is contention that they are the first peoples of Southern Africa and therefore are the rightful owners or custodians of the land in Africa vs the Bantu who are considered recent migrants.

but do they still exist today as a uniform group or have most of them been incorporated into other ethnic groups i.e Bantu and the coloreds of the cape

What are you thoughts, contributions.?

Thanks.

NiyiRocks:
The guy is spot on in his assertion.
Winnie was fvcking some young idiotic lawyer by the name Mpofu who was also connected to several of the covert murders back in the apartheid days. She shamelessly even fell out with him when she discovered the prick was screwing some younger punanies.
27 years is a long time to wait for a hot blooded South African female so I don't stand in judgement of her but Nelson did what any sane self respecting African man would do. If justice was to be duly served, Winnie would have spent some considerable part of her years in jail for those murders. Madiba obviously used his influence to prevent that- apt payback for her contribution to the struggle if you ask me. She never dropped his name cos she knew the privileges and accolades that go with the Mandela legacy.

This is pretty much the truth

Zuluhead:
Kindly clear some doubts of mine, during the apertheid where blacks or african american given the same treatment with south african blacks?

Not very clear on this question. if you are asking did Black South Africans suffer the same kinds of discrimination as AA, the answer is yes they did.

The experience was very similar if not identical to the situations that went on in the US.

Mama that fought for the continent. Beautiful even at 81. You will be missed and your memory and works will be with us forever

Viva Africa!


Rest in perfect peace Mama!

MduZA:
You cant provide your country stats either therefore your writeup is just another boy dream who is tired of having Egusi soap breakfast..You will scream on top of your voice when I tell you " ukuthi" you don't even know your own hiv status..HIV is rife in Nigeria..fact

You are a big Mumu!

Bantu education.

shervydman:
May sense locate u wherever u are.

and the congregation yelled out a big "AMEN!"

Obi1kenobi:
Africa has about 600 million hectares of uncultivated arable land, an incredible 60% of the global total. I'm not sure of the exact figures for South Africa specifically, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was like Zimbabwe where basically, the land that white farmers spent generations tilling and making fertile was the land coveted by Mugabe's goons even though millions of acres of arable land not held by white farmers lay fallow.

60% is the correct number for Arable land in Africa in total

As far as South Africa is concerned 87% of the most arable land is in the hands of the settler population even though they are a minority in number. That's not sensible, that's not right and that's not justice any which way you want to spin it.

You forget to narrate the reason Mugabe resulted to forced overtaking of land when the Lancaster agreements willing buyer, willing seller proposal was ignored and snubbed at by the British government that supported it in the first place.

Obi1kenobi:
It's interesting that Africans have no problems with the ancient conquests of their ancestors (like how Shaka forged the Zulu nation), but white conquest is a guilt that white people must live with for eternity. Bantus are as much migrants to South Africa (from East and West Africa) as white settlers. Infact, white settlers arrived the Cape Colony in great numbers at a time it was barely inhabited by the Bantus (mostly Khoisans were found there). Friction came as the whites moved further North. I do not believe that there is some kind of "entitlement" to those lands, as if they were thriving agricultural hubs before the whites took over them and I do not buy that it "belongs" to the blacks.

This is the historical narrative aspoused by the Afrikaner settlers, its historical inaccurate.

Point 1. There were no mass conquests of lands in Africa by Tribal groups in antiquity. Shaka's conquest was more of an absorbing of the tribes he conquered into the Zulu nation, in reality the smaller tribes were already distant relatives of the Nguni's. He simply amalgamated them into one group. White settlers were far more brutal and unjust, driven by the then notion of these groups as having some sort of divine right to conquer the world, they were brute in their taking over of lands north of the cape.

There is contention with the notion of the time frame of the arrival of Bantu groups into South Africa. For certain they did not inhabit the Western cape colonies in mass but to the east, North east and what is kinda of central South Africa smaller groups are likely to have inhabited those areas along with the nomadic San people. There is significant interbreeding that is evident among the bantu and the san peoples of South Africa which likewise legitimizes their rights to the land as well in addition to Colored groups in the western and Northern capes who have Khoi ancestry as well, so technically speaking all "black" people including the Khoisan who are also "black" people constitute the original peoples of Southern Africa who inhabited lands in that area therefore collectively have a claim to the lands, especially the Arable parts.

Obi1kenobi:
Look, I love to cite the success of Jewish people a lot when black people embrace the safety blanket that their only obstacle to progress is all the sins that whites have committed against them. Anyone who has studied what the Jewish people went through in Europe, while still thriving amidst disenfranchisement, discrimination and suppression that ultimately led to their near extinction in the Holocaust, and seen how they thrive today would just move on from the dark days of history.

If South Africa execute this, they will pay for it and they will regret it. I don't have a shred of doubt in my mind. They need to move on from their apartheid trauma if Julius Malema is not to lead them off a cliff. Those were very ugly days, but a modern race war is not going to help them.

In my humble opinion, it is not a race war, its the righting of an injustice, you cannot erase that. Its a reparations package which the Jewish people I might add got.

Again you cannot have 87% of arable land in the hands of less than 10% of the population when it was acquired unjustly. Conquest of lands is not an excuse not to hand it back to who had first rights on it. That is Ludacris. In the end this is an economics issue and not an issue of if black people hate white people or anything having to do with White guilt, those are emotional distractions.

Give the land to the owners, if they mishandle it, fine. They can contract back white people to come fix it for them and create a profit sharing scheme where the blacks get royalties from the use of the land and the "experts get compensated for their operations of the land.

Shikena

Jkay187:
Now morphy u just eluded to the fact that Nigeria has higher HIV numbers in total so that proves my point that some of your Naija brothers here are wrong when they come here and tell us whenever we argue or have a discussion that SA is hiv infested.

Their observation is somewhat understandable. In comparison as I have said, the probability of contracting HIV from unprotected sex in South Africa is higher than it will be in Nigeria even though in absolute numbers Nigeria will have a higher NUMBER of HIV incidents reported or unreported.

Jkay187:
When looking at SA's access to hiv treatment it is currently the worlds biggest, now compare that to Nigeria and its access to treatment and stigma attached to hiv in nigeria especially in the North of your country it is safe to say you have a higher disease burden then SA if we include factors like TB also.

Until you can prove that Nigeria as a nation has better access to primary health care compared to SA, you must agree that your brothers in arms here on this thread is wrong.

Access to HIV treatment does not weigh in on the number of infected or the potential to become infected. It just means that those who contract it will have a better prognosis and the mother to Baby transmission will be at a lower to zero rate if detected early. Therefore you cannot uses this point successfully in this argument.

Even if I concede that Nigeria has a poorer health care system, it doe snot affect does not significantly affect the rate of transmission, NOTE I said "SIGNIFICANTLY affect the rate".

Fact still remains that you are more likely to contract HIV in South Africa than in Nigeria. A 1 in 4 infection rate and a 1 in 17 infection rate are not the same.