Madagascar, an “African” island part II

Robert Lindsay has taken issue with my post about black Africans not being capable of reaching Madagascar even though it is so close to the African coast.  Here are his objections:

1)  There may have been pre-Austronesian people in Madagascar long ago – who got there by boat.

2)  Madagascar is not just a few miles off the coast of Africa.  It is 250 miles away.

3)  Africans of 70,000 years ago colonized the rest of the world by boat so clearly they are capable of such technology.

I don’t buy #3 because there is no evidence that the Africans who left Africa 70,000 years ago were negro nor am I aware of solid evidence they traveled by boat.  But more importantly, the whole “out of Africa” theory is shaky and in serious doubt.

As for #1 and #2, these are valid points worthy of further discussion.

For a while now, the question of the negritos has been bugging me.  The negritos are short-statured, dark-skinned peoples who used to inhabit a vast area from the islands of the Indian Ocean all the way to Japan.  Genetically, they are distinct from African negroes and, by most accounts, their average I.Q. is lower.  Though it has usually been assumed that these small people must have reached the islands by boat, somebody (I lost the link) brought up an interesting point: What about the various animal species that lived on isolated islands?  Did they also build boats in order to get there?  The point is that if we allow for the possibility that animals could have colonized the islands by accidentally floating there on driftwood, then the same possibility exists for humans.  This being said, my gut feeling is that the ancestors of the negritos did arrive by boat and this was before they had evolved to their current small size possibly through insular dwarfism.  It is very likely, in my opinion, that the sea-faring ancestors of the negritos had a higher average I.Q. than their modern descendants.  The same selective forces that brought about small stature would also have brought about smaller brains (the brain is the largest consumer of calories among the organs).  In other words, high I.Q. would have been counter-adaptive on these small islands.  The costs would not have justified the benefits.   But Madagascar is not a small island.  It is huge.  Perhaps these people evolved into negritos on the nearby Comoros islands and then found their way to Madagascar.  Be it as it may, the presence of indigenous people in Madagascar, prior to the arrival of the Austronesians, is not relevant to my point unless it is shown that these people came from Africa.   The negritos are more distant, genetically, from black Africans, than any other group.

As for Madagascar being more than just a few miles off the coast of Africa, I shall concede this point to Mr. Lindsay.  I will even add to it that the Indian Ocean currents favor a trans-Indian Ocean voyage over an Africa to Madagascar voyage.  At the same time, the vast difference in distance between Bornea and Africa to Madagascar should not easily be dismissed.

Robert Lindsay is not exactly a race-realist and certainly not a white-nationalist.  But I like a lot of what he writes and he is a gentleman.  Also, he links to this blog.  So I have added his blog to my own blogroll.

About jewamongyou

I am a paleolibertarian Jew who is also a race-realist. My opinions are often out of the mainstream and often considered "odd" but are they incorrect? Feel free to set me right if you believe so!
This entry was posted in racial differences and how they manifest themselves/race science. Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to Madagascar, an “African” island part II

  1. Hi, the original inhabitants of Madagascar were not Negritos. They were some sort of African hunter gatherers. They appear to have arrived in Madagascar a very long time ago, possibly by some sort of craft. What is interesting is that the Africans who came later, after the primitive hunter gatherers, had apparently forgotten or never learned how to float to Madagascar. A case of the earlier people knowing more than the later folks.

    The people who left Africa 70,000 YBP were mostly certainly Black. So we all came from a Black man. I am ok with that, because before that, we came from frogs. The Negritos were the first to leave Africa. I do not believe that their IQ’s have declined since 70,000 YBP. Primitive peoples the world over have low IQ’s. These low IQ’s were sufficient in primitive to do this and that and mostly to survive, which is all that is important.

    I do not believe that Negritos have low IQ’s because they are small or have shrunken brains. No one knows what the Negrito IQ is. They seem to be going extinct anyway. Racially, Negritos are Asians.

    I guess the take home point, if you want to talk about stupidity of Africans, is that primitive Africans figured out how to get to Madagascar, but the later, more advanced ones, forgot about it! Which is rather damning in and of itself.

    Truth is that I am a race realist, but I’m also a Leftist, so I don’t like to talk about that very much. It’s like one of those unpleasant family secrets no one wants to talk about but we all know it’s true.

  2. Bantu Education says:

    Isn’t there some evidence of negroes inhabiting the Amazon basin before the arrival of the “Native” Americans?

  3. Jamerson Mckracken says:

    I’m glad you are back, Jewamongyou. I have missed you’re (very interesting) posts, on a daily basis-

  4. portland1realist says:

    Perhaps it has nothing to do with I.Q. My theory, which I’ll admit I have no evidence for, is that black Africans have a slightly higher natural fear of water than the other human races. Sort of like most, but not all cats will not go into water.

    I like Robert Lindsay as well. What does irk me a bit is the way he sates things as if they are undeniable and inarguable facts that he is the ultimate expert on. This statement for example:

    “The people who left Africa 70,000 YBP were mostly certainly Black.”

    • Reactionary_Konkvistador says:

      They where Black as in dark skinned, but if anything isn’t the Negro a young branch of mankind? I had assumed they had evolved due to the section pressures of Tropical farming in West Africa, this also fits with the few skeletons found so far. The Evolution of Eastern Africans seems a bit more complicated.

  5. Jamerson Mckracken says:

    I really have reservations about this 70,000
    year BP date…

    • Insightful says:

      Jamerson, the date is backed up by genetics. Genetics which we used to prove who is the daddy of a child or match Osama’s living kin to his body for a positive ID. Believe it or not but from what I’ve read and understand, the out of africa migration took place around 60,000 years ago instead of 70,000.

  6. anonymous says:

    Anyone who simply tosses out a date like 60 or 70K years ago and says “that’s when it happened” hasn’t thought things through. People always talks about a “split” and just assume it was a single occurrence which took place one time in a single location. Divergence isn’t clean. It’s messy and convoluted. For example, take the split between hominids and chimpanzees. Geneticists can’t give an honest date for that either because they continued to interbreed for about 2 million years before they finally separated for good.

    The first hominids left Africa over a million years ago. And groups have trickled out sporadically ever since. And what of the “back to africa” migrations that have occurred?

    http://goo.gl/O00H3

    One simply can’t date it because it wasn’t a single event and it didn’t take place at a single time or location.

    • Insightful says:

      All men today have inherited their Y chromosomes from a man who lived 60,000 years ago in Africa. He has been named Y-chromosomal Adam. It is now believed that MORE men participated in the out of Africa exodus of early humans than women based on comparing non-sex-specific chromosomes with sex-specific ones.

      It has been estimated that from a population of 2,000 to 5,000 individuals in Africa,only a small group, possibly as few as 150 people, crossed the Red Sea. (Note that this is the reason why their is greater genetic diversity in Africa than elsewhere because far more people stayed behind than left). Of all the lineages present in Africa only the female descendants of one lineage, mtDNA haplogroup L3, are found outside Africa. Had there been several migrations one would expect descendants of more than one lineage to be found outside Africa.

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