...
EgyptSearch Forums Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» EgyptSearch Forums » Deshret » Bogus Amarna Egyptian findings thoroughly DEBUNKED

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: Bogus Amarna Egyptian findings thoroughly DEBUNKED
White Nord
Member
Member # 14093

Rate Member
Icon 10 posted      Profile for White Nord     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Found this thread started on another forum, where the recent Afrocentric wet dream of a southern African origin for ancient Egypt has been thoroughly debunked. He also shows the inconsistencies of this latest Afro-centric argument with data on hair and crania analysis in which Afro-nuts used East Africans as their problem solver. Round of applauds to that poster.

http://hamiticunion.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=38

Back to the drawing board.

Posts: 217 | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Omo Baba
Member
Member # 18816

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Omo Baba         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
That laughable hamitic site is obviously run by some eurocentrist nutcase trying to drive a wedge between the African people. I am not surprise you 'know' of such sites. LOL.

--------------------
It was high time

Posts: 314 | From: Home | Registered: Apr 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by .Charlie Bass.:
http://dnatribes.com/dnatribes-digest-2012-01-01.pdf

Geographical analysis of the Amarna mummies was performed using their autosomal STR
profiles based on 8 tested loci.
4

Results are summarized in Table 1 and illustrated in Figure 1. Maps for
individual Amarna mummies are included in Figures 2-8 in the Appendix.

Discussion: Average MLI scores in Table 1 indicate the STR profiles of the Amarna mummies would be
most frequent in present day populations of several African regions: including the Southern African (average MLI 326.94), African Great Lakes (average MLI 323.76), and Tropical West African (average MLI 83.74) regions.

These regional matches do not necessarily indicate an exclusively African ancestry for the
Amarna pharaonic family. However, results indicate these ancient individuals inherited some alleles that today are more frequent in populations of Africa than in other parts of the world (such as D18S51=19 and D21S11=34).


 -

Even Dienekes is claiming a "African" origin of the Amarna mummies.

They seem to indicate that there is something definitely "African" about this collection of mummies. - Dienekes [/QB][/QUOTE]

--------------------
C. A. Winters

Posts: 12259 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Below we compare Egyptians to West Africans. The Amarna mummies are closer to the Southern African (average MLI 326.94), African Great Lakes (average MLI 323.76), and Tropical West African (average MLI 83.74) regions—not the Horners.


 -

.


This study supports the linguistic evidence supporting a relationship between West African languages and Egyptian.

The Iconography also supports this relationship.


 -

 -


.

--------------------
C. A. Winters

Posts: 12259 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
White Nord
Member
Member # 14093

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for White Nord     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
No now you all want to completely disregard what you have been asserting for a decade now which is that they were East Africans (based on numerous spammed studies on anatomical traits) and now go full throttle that to a position that they were full blooded Negroes like those in southern Africa? Not one study will group the ancient Egyptians with southern Africans or great lake specimens over Middle Easterners. In fact one of you all's entire bullshit bitching points about studies like clines and clusters was that Brace used southern and central africans (to represent negroids) to compare to ancient egyptian specimens, which turned out to have "no relationship whatsoever" with them. So yall wanted to run to East Africans as the a representative for Egypt. Now yall want to hop on this commercial genetic analysis because it caters to your true fantasy of a true negroid Egypt and now drop East Africans altogether. How hypocritical of you all. lol what about this spam that you Zaharan used to plaster on every fucking thread

 -

Now yall are just going to dump all of this, for this amarna findings...wow.

Posts: 217 | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
asante-Korton
Member
Member # 18532

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for asante-Korton     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by White Nord:
No now you all want to completely disregard what you have been asserting for a decade now which is that they were East Africans (based on numerous spammed studies on anatomical traits) and now go full throttle that to a position that they were full blooded Negroes like those in southern Africa? Not one study will group the ancient Egyptians with southern Africans or great lake specimens over Middle Easterners. In fact one of you all's entire bullshit bitching points about studies like clines and clusters was that Brace used southern and central africans (to represent negroids) to compare to ancient egyptian specimens, which turned out to have "no relationship whatsoever" with them. So yall wanted to run to East Africans as the a representative for Egypt. Now yall want to hop on this commercial genetic analysis because it caters to your true fantasy of a true negroid Egypt and now drop East Africans altogether. How hypocritical of you all. lol what about this spam that you Zaharan used to plaster on every fucking thread

 -

Now yall are just going to dump all of this, for this amarna findings...wow.

you seem to be hurt by these new dna results lol i guess this blows away your fantasy white Caucasoid egypt haha [Big Grin] [Big Grin]
Posts: 1064 | Registered: Jan 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Moderator
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
keep in mind the Nordic Egypt crowd's current position seems to be that the Old Kingdom was the white Egypt period

 -

Posts: 32087 | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Moderator
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Omo Baba:
That laughable hamitic site is obviously run by some eurocentrist nutcase trying to drive a wedge between the African people. I am not surprise you 'know' of such sites. LOL.

the administartor's name is Noah. he doesn't like the DNATribe's report because of it's low N. African percentages

http://hamiticunion.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=viewprofile&user=admin

His profile signature is this:

___________________________________

Noah
signature

Apart from relatively late Semitic influence...the civilizations of Africa are the civilizations of the Hamites, its history is the record of these peoples and of their interaction with the two other African stocks, the Negro and the Bushmen, whether this influence was exerted by highly civilized Egyptians or by such wider pastoralists as are represented at the present day by the Beja and Somali.
____________________________________

the Noah thread mentioned in the OP:

http://hamiticunion.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=38

A recent genetics study by the commercial genetic testing company DNA Tribes analysed the DNA of an Ancient Egyptian pharaonic family from the Amarna site in Middle Egypt. Among the studied remains were those of the boy-king Tutankhamun, his young mother, and his relatives Amenhotep III and Yuya. The authors examined the autosomal STR profiles of the mummies based on 8 loci, and basically conclude that, of all the contemporary populations they studied -- including modern Egyptians -- all of the mummies by far shared greatest affinities with the Sub-Saharan samples (Southern African, African Great Lakes and Tropical West African).

Admixture notwithstanding, Negroid peoples do not share any significant biological relations with modern Egyptians (who are the actual direct descendants of the Ancient Egyptians, as we'll see further below). That includes the neighboring Nilotes. Multiple studies have shown this, including the recent peer-reviewed Babiker et al. (2011), which analysed almost twice as many autosomal STRs as the DNA Tribes paper (15 vs. 8).

Posts: 32087 | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Moderator
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Noah, hamitic union thread continued:

This is an important specification because research has demonstrated that studies using only 10 autosomal loci have a huge statistical margin of error of over 30%. And that margin of error steadily decreases as one increases the number of markers analysed.

"Thus the answer to the question “How often is a pair of individuals from one population genetically more dissimilar than two individuals chosen from two different populations?” depends on the number of polymorphisms used to define that dissimilarity and the populations being compared. The answer, can be read from Figure 2. Given 10 loci, three distinct populations, and the full spectrum of polymorphisms (Figure 2E), the answer is ≅ 0.3, or nearly one-third of the time. With 100 loci, the answer is ∼20% of the time and even using 1000 loci, ≅ 10%. However, if genetic similarity is measured over many thousands of loci, the answer becomes “never” when individuals are sampled from geographically separated populations."

http://www.genetics.org/content/176/1/351.full
 -

This DNA Tribes paper uses even fewer loci than 10, so its margin of error is considerably higher than 30%. What good are genetic 'findings' that are around 40% likely to be wrong? Not especially useful let alone accurate.
The comparatively weaker biological ties suggested in the DNA Tribes article between Horners & North Africans with the Amarna mummies relative to those posited between Negroid Africans with the Amarna mummies is another immediate red flag. Neither craniometric analyses nor dental studies nor cultural affinities nor historical data (including recorded self-perceptions) nor hair morphology nor linguistic research support such a privileged relationship. Quite the opposite.

Except for obviously populations in North Africa & the Horn, the fact that kinky hair texture is the only hair form found in Africa also undermines a hypothesized Negroid origin for the Ancient Egyptians. As the anthropologist Jean Hiernaux has pointed out, "over most of the subcontinent, spiralled hair is the only category to be observed[...] the lowest frequencies of spiralled hair in sub-Saharan Africa have been observed in Ethiopia and Somalia, with a minimum in the Somali".

Despite all of the above, the DNA Tribes paper would have us believe that modern Egyptians, North Africans in general & Horners are much less related to the Amarna Egyptian mummies than are Negroid Africans... almost as distantly related to the Amarna Egyptian mummies as are Northwest Europeans. In fact, in its Table 1 shown below, mummy KV55 (who is identified as "possibly Akhenaten or Smenkhkare") has a Match Likelihood Index/MLI score for Northwest Europe that is over twice that of its MLI for the Horn and North African samples and higher than all of the other circum-Meditternanean usual suspects' MLIs too (Levantine, Arabian, Aegean, Mesopotamian, etc.). But all of these MLI scores are likewise completely dwarfed by the Negroid populations' MLI scores. And not just with respect to mummy KV55, but vis-a-vis all of the mummies; especially Tutankhamun.

 -

So where did the Ancient Egyptians get their many Caucasoid affinities from, particularly their typical dark brown, cymotrichous (wavy) hair, if their nearest modern relatives are supposedly Negroid peoples? From spiralled-haired Nilotes? Not likely.

Below are actual photos of two of the Amarna mummies, Yuya and Thuya, that the DNA Tribes data suggests share closer biological links with West/South/Southeast Africans than they do with even modern Egyptians.

 -
Yuya

 -
Thuya
 -
Bantu man...Yuya and Thuya relative?
 -

Egyptian man... not Yuya and Thuya relative?

 -
Somali man... not Yuya and Thuya relative?
 -

Besides Yuya and Thuya's very different facial structure and features, their hair is of the typical Ancient (and modern) Egyptian cymotrichous/wavy Caucasoid variety; the blonde appearance is due to the mummification process.

The fact that the Meroites of Kush -- who shared morphological and cultural ties with the Ancient Egyptians to their north, and were actually considered on average to have had greater Sub-Saharan influences; see the Modern Nubians thread -- were found to be predominantly of Eurasian descent (~61%) also precludes Negroid origins for the related Egyptians.

"The Hpal (np3,592) mitochondrial DNA marker is a selectively neutral mutation that is very common in sub-Saharan Africa and is almost absent in North African and European populations. It has been screened in a Meroitic sample from ancient Nubia through PCR amplification and posterior enzyme digestion, to evaluate the sub-Saharan genetic influences in this population. From 29 individuals analysed, only 15 yield positive amplifications, four of them (26.7%) displaying the sub-Saharan African marker. Hpa I (np3,592) marker is present in the sub-Saharan populations at a frequency of 68.7 on average. Thus, the frequency of genes from this area in the Merotic Nubian population can be estimated at around 39% (with a confidence interval from 22% to 55%). The frequency obtained fits in a south-north decreasing gradient of Hpa I (np3,592) along the African continent. Results suggest that morphological changes observed historically in the Nubian populations are more likely to be due to the existence of south-north gene flow through the Nile Valley than to in-situ evolution."

http://mathildasanthropologyblog.wordpre....ncient-nubians/

From what I've been able to gather on the company, DNA Tribes' SNP work is generally considered reliable. Its autosomal STR tests (i.e. this study's methodology), however, are another matter entirely. Folks have been complaining about their inaccuracies for years. Some examples:

--"The autosomal STR test from DNA Tribes is rather unreliable/inconsistent. The SNP test may not pinpoint to populations with 100% accuracy, but will rarely give results so wildly inaccurate as the DNA Tribes STR test."

--"Yeah, it is very unreliable, although my native population result was quite reliable, though global numbers were senseless. I noticed this question only because I saw earlier some small, but anyway interesting Asian admix values among Portugueses."

--"Although I am contrasted fully of Iberian Background, the analysis of DNA tribes show me that I'm overwhelming Chinese- Aboriginal Australian !!!! no European matches! They even tried to justify themselves with a possible "drift through Northern-Africa". Pleaseeeeeeeeee.... Not serious and a huge nonsense waste of money. of course, I don't recommend it at all"

So far, about three studies on the DNA profile of the Ancient Egyptians have been released. Two of them are questionable: the Swiss company iGENEA's claim that King Tut belongs to the common Western European paternal haplogroup R1b1a2, and of course this latest DNA Tribes misadventure.

The third analysis of Ancient Egyptian DNA was recently conducted in Egypt by a team of researchers, including Professor Moamena Kamel of the Cairo University Medical School. Its results are legit & logical; they were aired in the PBS documentary Secrets of the Pharaohs. The scientists found that "the DNA confirmed a close relationship between the modern Egyptians living in the Nile Valley and the ancient workers who had been buried there." According to Professor Kamel, (transcripted from the video):

"People who are living here, they are the same as the people who had been living 6000 years ago... And now the moderns are the descendants of these Ancient Egyptians."

Since most modern Egyptians are the lineal descendants of the ancient Egyptians and are, per Kamel et al., also essentially still "the same" as the Ancient Egyptians (i.e. there's population continuity), the autosomal affinities of the modern Egyptians are a good indication of the biological makeup of their ancestors. On this point, various studies, including genome-wide analyses, have consistently shown modern Egyptians in general as being overwhelmingly of West Eurasian descent. That includes Upper Egyptians according to Omran et al. (2009):


"Multi-dimensional scaling (MDS) based on pair-wise FST genetic distances of Upper Egyptian and other diverse global populations. OCE, Oceanian; ME, Middle Eastern; NAF, North African; EAS, East Asian; SSA, sub-Saharan African; UEGY, Upper Egyptian; SAS, South Asian; EUR, European. The figure shows that Oceania and American populations are very distant from Upper Egyptians (marked by a grey triangle) and other populations. The Upper Egyptian population is closer to the Middle Eastern, North African, South Asian and European populations than others."

So the most that can be argued from this DNA Tribes study is that the Amarna royal dynasty may have largely, but not necessarily exclusively, been of non-Egyptian, West/South/Southeast African origin. In other words, they may have been among the group of foreigners that interrupted Ancient Egyptian rule at various periods throughout history, such as the Nubians, Persians, Greeks and Assyrians.

As it turns out, a putative non-Egyptian origin for the Amarna pharaonic family is the only claim that the DNA Tribes authors make. They do not use their results on this group of royals to infer anything about the genetic makeup of the general Ancient Egyptian population. This is a sensible move on DNA Tribes' part since ruling classes, particularly in Africa, are often not of the same ancestral background as the commonfolk.

However, as we already saw, even this somewhat conservative scenario is unlikely given the following:

Contra recommendations, the DNA Tribes study utilized a very small number of markers in reaching its conclusions. This results in a very large statistical margin of error/likelihood of being wrong; in this case, on the order of almost 40%.
Just about all lines of evidence consistently affirm much closer ties between modern Egyptian, North & Horn African (i.e. Hamitic) populations with the Ancient Egyptians than between the Ancient Egyptians and Negroid peoples. That includes very obvious phenotypic factors such as hair form and general physical appearance.
DNA Tribes' autosomal STR analyses have long had a reputation of unreliability and erratic matches.
The related peoples of ancient Meroe were shown to be predominantly of Eurasian descent, and they are traditionally viewed as having been more Sub-Saharan admixed than were the Ancient Egyptians.
A large-scale study on Ancient Egyptian DNA has already demonstrated that modern Egyptians are both direct descendants of and essentially the same people as the Ancient Egyptians.
Those same modern Egyptians also have little biological ties with Negroid peoples.

_______________________________________________________


It seems like Bettyboo might make a good hamitic union member.

Posts: 32087 | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Moderator
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
http://hamiticunion.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=37

The Mediterranean race in East Africa
by Carleton Coon

quote:
Originally posted by Noah:

A classic study by the influential Carleton Coon.

Another good, book-length examination of all things Hamitic is A Contribution to the History of the Hamitic Peoples of Africa by Kenneth Howard Honea. I've posted some short excerpts from it here. It covers almost everything from Hamitic cave art, material culture, social customs and state formation to archaeology, linguistics, physical anthropology and migration patterns. Very thorough, with an extensive bibliography and many illustrations in the back (the binding's a little flimsy though). Highly recommended.

quote:
Originally posted by Noah:

http://hamiticunion.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=26

I broadly agree that modern Horn Africans are in the main a mixture of various West Eurasian elements with a separate component indigenous to East Africa. However, I think this observation deserves further qualification.

To start, the indigenous African component appears to be an intrusive element. This is suggested by the fact that, if one examines the paternal and maternal DNA profiles of the main Horn groups and compares them to those of North Africans (who, I think you'll agree, are essentially West Eurasian), like, say, Egyptians, one is struck by the global similarity in uniparental markers. That is, paternally-speaking, Egyptians mainly belong to the E1b1b haplogroup that most Horners also belong to. Their mtDNA profile is also quite similar, albeit with less Sub-Saharan-associated markers. Like in the study below where SAMOVA analysis clusters the Horn sample with the Egyptian sample, but with a slightly greater pull toward the Sub-Saharan groups.....


It's the Sub-Saharan component that's clearly intrusive.




Posts: 32087 | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Brada-Anansi
Member
Member # 16371

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Brada-Anansi   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Here is the thang White Noise non but very few here believe in "phenotypical races" that's really a Eurocentrist POV as blacks we know our communities are very diverse..then again the broad featured folks you like to hate on were never absent from Kemet.. ever!! one may argue % but never absence,and the narrow featured folks??also break ranks as they are found through out Africa in varying degrees..so yes bitches start studying the culture of the entire Nile valley and those of the great lakes and beyond to find the origins of Kemetian and Nile Valley civilizations in general.
Posts: 6546 | From: japan | Registered: Feb 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator

Member
Member # 19312

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Dù     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
 -

Tigre people
 -

keep in mind that Tigre people are part Beja..

Posts: 558 | From: Earth | Registered: Jul 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness is a guy IRL
Member
Member # 18409

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness is a guy IRL     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Very odd White Nord links to that website.

The website he links to is anti-Nordic. It is run by a group of poser Hamites, mostly Somalis, who are mixed race but are claiming they are pure-blooded Caucasoid.

Check this post by ''hamiticsister'':

http://hamiticunion.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=10

quote:
You know Adam and Eve were not White? They were what many scholars resemble Dravidians or Hamites like modern day Somalis, Ethiopians, or Tamils
This strange person thinks modern day dark skinned Somalis and ethiopians are pure-blooded Hamites.

quote:
Who says their white besides those Eurocentric nuckleheads.
quote:
LOL the Europeans jacked our red name
quote:
Senor Guissepe Sergi who has said that the ancient peoples who have inhabited Greece, Italy, Sicily, and Spain were Hamitic people.
While it may be true that there was a Hamitic racial substratum to these places, Hamiticsister believes modern somalis and ethiopians (who are mixed race) are pure-blooded Cauasoids. It is absurd.

Everyone on that forum hates white europeans and is dark skinned and they have deluded themselves that they are pure-blooded Hamitic Caucasoids.

What's very bizarre is the fact that Hamiticsister and the other users of that forum would be labelled ''black'' or ''negro'' by the afrocentrics on this forum. They identify with very dark skin and other african features, but oddly think they are Caucasoid.

Posts: 2408 | From: ??? | Registered: Dec 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Whatbox
Member
Member # 10819

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Whatbox   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness:
keep in mind the Nordic Egypt crowd's current position seems to be that the Old Kingdom was the white Egypt period

 -

Lol good one (picture wise), heheh. That's (that picture is) moving the goal-posts, I get it. They do that sometimes, though in this case I thought that was old news, the "original Egyptians" or Old Kingdom time thing. Could be mistaken.

You are funny sometimes. Some of those times it hasn't gone unnoticed as I'm watching.

http://www.travel-destination-pictures.com/images/500/cougar_248.jpg

Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
White Nord
Member
Member # 14093

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for White Nord     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by KoKaKoLa:
 -

Tigre people
 -

keep in mind that Tigre people are part Beja..

Now compare how distant real negroid southern Africans like Ugandans and Tanzanians are from the Badarian samples.
Posts: 217 | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
osirion
Member
Member # 7644

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for osirion     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
^ so called real Negroids live in a different climate than the population you are referring to. Facial form is plastic and epigenetics can easily explain sudden shifts.

Latest results of studying Chinese remains show that a single agricultural invention can change facial form features significantly in a population in less than 5000 years.

- see

Craniofacial Differences Between Modern and Archaeological Asian Skeletal Populations

Chan, Wing Nam Joyce


Highlight: These results are interpreted to indicate that environmental factors have played a large role in altering cranial shape in these two ethnically Asian populations since genetic alteration in the areas has not been documented. Environmental factors have caused isometric changes in cranial shape as crania have become distinct from their ancestral counterparts. Cultural changes, such as diet shifts and modernization, are possible causative agents for these changes witnessed in these populations.

Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova
Member
Member # 15718

Icon 1 posted      Profile for zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by White Nord:
No now you all want to completely disregard what you have been asserting for a decade now which is that they were East Africans (based on numerous spammed studies on anatomical traits) and now go full throttle that to a position that they were full blooded Negroes like those in southern Africa? Not one study will group the ancient Egyptians with southern Africans or great lake specimens over Middle Easterners. In fact one of you all's entire bullshit bitching points about studies like clines and clusters was that Brace used southern and central africans (to represent negroids) to compare to ancient egyptian specimens, which turned out to have "no relationship whatsoever" with them. So yall wanted to run to East Africans as the a representative for Egypt. Now yall want to hop on this commercial genetic analysis because it caters to your true fantasy of a true negroid Egypt and now drop East Africans altogether. How hypocritical of you all. lol what about this spam that you Zaharan used to plaster on every fucking thread

 -

Now yall are just going to dump all of this, for this amarna findings...wow.

Yawn.. Nord, Nord, babe! Have you not been biotchslapped
enough already this year? You open with the usual
bogus strawman huh about "yall" this and "y'all" that?
Sigh.. Sorry White Nincompoop. No credible ES vet has
gone around claiming that the Egyptians derive from
southern Africans as a result of the Armana thing.
They merely note that for the mummies studied, said
mummies show relationships with some sub-Saharan populations,
among which, southern Africans appear to be prominent.
That's it. Your strawman re some glowing claim
'bout south Africans is yet more nonsense manufactured
in a brain with an IQ just a few degrees below whale shiit.

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


Not one study will group the ancient Egyptians with southern Africans or great lake specimens over Middle Easterners.

^^Nord, Nord... sigh.... bitchslap time... QUOTE:

"On this basis, many have postulated that the Badarians
are relatives to South African populations
(Morant, 1935 G. Morant, A study of predynastic
Egyptian skulls from Badari based on measurements
taken by Miss BN Stoessiger and Professor DE
Derry, Biometrika 27 (1935), pp. 293–309.Morant,
1935; Mukherjee et al., 1955; Irish and Konigsberg, 2007)."


-- Godde K. (2009) An Examination of Nubian and Egyptian biological distances

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


As for the mummies, common disease vectors in the
Nile Valley and in pats of East Africa where Bantu populations
live could well be part of any resemblance. DNA
studies show that certain disease pathogens
found in "sub-Saharan" Africa also appear in the
Nile Valley, another example of how tropical
peoples may be related across large areas of Africa.
There is a particular biting sandfly for example that is not
found in the Nile Valley. Diseases caused by this fly
however, show up in the Nile Valley, indicating that the
infections were brought there by tropical Africans
from other places.
Or similar vectors in similar environments gave rise
to similar blood conditions. Tut for example shows
several signs of bouts with malaria, (Hawass
2010) as do numerous peoples in East Africa who have been hit
with malaria.

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

Disease study of the ancient Nile Valley peoples

[Malaria:] "Several attempts were made to identify the DNA of Plasmodium falciparum in the human
remains, one of the parasites responsible for malaria. Rabino Massa et al. (2000) used immunological
tests to screen 80 mummies from the site of Gebelen near Luxor, Egypt dated
to 3200 BCE. Th e Plasmodium antigen (histidine-rich protein PfHRP-2) was found in 43%
of samples (and in 92% of samples with porotic hyperostosis). Such a high frequency of cases
caused doubts concerning the specifi city of the antigen based test (Nerlich et al. 2008).

A positive Plasmodium identifi cation via immunological methods was also reported for a
Granville 50 Mateusz Baca, Martyna Molak mummy—a 50 year old woman from the site of Gurna,
Egypt dated to 700 BCE (Miller et al. 1994). Reexamination of this specimen using
PCR-based methods yielded negative results.
Th ese results could be due to the diff erential preservation of DNA and proteins in
this individual, but serious doubt concerning the reliability of the immunological test arose
(Taylor et al. 1997). A recent survey of Nerlich et al. (2008) yielded more realistic results. 91
specimens were screened for Plasmodium DNA, 7 from the Predynastic to Early Dynastic site
of Abydos (3500–2800 BCE), 42 from a Middle Kingdom tomb in Th ebes West (2050–1650
BCE), and 42 from other tombs also from Th ebes West, dated from the Middle Kingdom
until the Late Period. PCR of a fragment of a pfcrt gene (P. falciparum chloroquine-resistance
transporter gene) was attempted and resulted in two positive amplifi cations. Th e specifi -
city of the obtained PCR products was confi rmed by carrying out the sequencing in two
independent laboratories.


[Diptheria:] Zink et al. (2001c) screened 450 individuals from Th ebes West searching for Corynebacterium
diphtheriae, the pathogenic bacteria responsible for diphtheria. Of the 40 samples that
yielded amplifi able DNA, one positive PCR result was obtained with starters targeting eubacterial
16S rDNA. Th e presence of Corynebacterium spp. DNA was confi rmed in only
one specimen, the head of a woman buried in Dra Abu el Nega (Th ebes West) dated to
1580–1080 BCE. A specifi c identifi cation of Corynebacterium diphtheriae species was not possible.
However, in conjunction with inscriptions found in the tomb describing the treatment
of a disease bearing resemblance to diphtheria, the presence of C. diphtheriae seems likely.
Th e presence of Corynebacterium diphtheriae in the ancient mummy was not surprising, since
diphtheria is common even in contemporary Egypt.


[Leishmaniasis:] Another parasite detected in human remains via aDNA analysis is the Leishmania donovani
complex; the parasite causing leishmaniasis. Zink et al. (2006) searched for L. donovani DNA in
91 bone samples from the above-mentioned Egyptian sites of Th ebes West and Abydos and in
70 samples from Nubian sites at Kulubnarti, Sudan. Th ese sites were early Christian cemeteries
dated from 550 to 750 CE and from 750 to 1500 CE. DNA sequences specifi c to Leishmania spp.
were PCR amplifi ed from 4 Egyptian and 9 Nubian samples. Based on frequencies of bacterial
presence, the authors conclude that leishmaniasis was endemic in Nubia during the 6th–8th centuries
CE. An examination of earlier samples would most likely have led to similar results since
Sudan (or East Africa in general) is considered as a place of origin of visceral leishmaniasis (Zink
et al. 2006). As all the Egyptian samples containing L. donovani DNA came exclusively from
a Middle Kingdom tomb and no samples from earlier periods yielded bacteria-positive results,
the authors suggest that the introduction of leishmaniasis to Egypt may have taken place during
the Middle Kingdom.

Th e presence of L. donovani in Egypt implies close trade contacts
between these countries as the distribution of L. donovani is closely associated with its vector
the phlebotomine sandfl y, which is absent in Nile Valley.
Zink et al. (2000) described a single case of bacteremia discovered when an infant mummy
from the Th ebes West cemetery was studied. Th e mummy was dated to 1000–750 BCE.
Genetic analysis revealed the presence of the DNA of several bacterial species, including Escherichia
coli, Frateuria auranta, and Halobacillus spp. Post mortem spread of E. coli through the
body was ruled out."


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

 -
SO save your bogus strawmen "Nord".
No one has "dropped East Africans."

Posts: 5107 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
dana marniche
Member
Member # 13149

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for dana marniche   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness:
keep in mind the Nordic Egypt crowd's current position seems to be that the Old Kingdom was the white Egypt period

 -

When and if autosomal dna study is done on the Old Kingdom it will undoubtedly be found that most of the royals there were even more African than the Amarna group.


Old kingdom peoples were more prognathic then some of the later Egyptian dynasties similar to many of the Nubians. Lets remember what was said of Seqnenre Tao "His entire lower facial complex, in fact, is so different from other pharaohs that he could be fitted more easily into the series of Nubian and Old Kingdom Giza skulls than into that of later Egyptian kings". James E. Harris, Kent R. Weeks, X-raying the Pharaohs, 1973.
[Smile]

Saqqara populations were probably similar.

Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | EgyptSearch!

(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com

Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3