posted                         

quote:

---

Many saw pictures of Nubians portaryed in Ancient tombs of Egypt as very black people.

In later times like Ramses third period, you see them portrayed almost like the Egyptians in brown colour skin.

Ancient Egypt was open to the Mesoptamian region 2000 years before the first dynasty in trade with settlements in that region, like Jenin and other settlements of Mesoptamia.

When you have trade that long, there is no way in Earth, that you have a pure nation by 3000 B.C. in Egypt.

You can not have trade relations with people, and no race mixing FOR SUCH A LONG PERIOD. There is no way you have war with people and u stay pure racially, and they stay pure.


Back to Nubia, Egyptians started infiltrating Nubia around 5000 years ago. While Egyptians with trade and wars with Mesoptamia, and anthropologiacl research say that Egyptians had Near Eastern genes, and it is only natural since there was interactions between Egyptaisn and the Near East, more than any other area, through its history.


By 3500 B.C., we start to see Nubians in Egyptian art depicted as brown, than just black like the rest of Africa as shown in the past, that is as a result of the intermixing of Egyptians and than their invasions of Nubia for long periods.

---

Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

I think all Africans, except few pockets have been influenced by an influx of people returning into Africa, not only AE.

---

quote:

---

And please every one don't bring the bust of Painkhy, the Nubian and call it of Menes

---

You mean this bust from the 1st dynasty of Abydos:



Please cite a source other than Arthur Kemp - stormfront white supremacist - who makes the claim that the above is a a 25th dynasty sculpture.

In other words, please cite a source that won't end up humiliating you, again.

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by AMR1:
Ausar

What is your explanation to the features of AE, most of it, there is no thick lips, big eyes, straight noses, straight hair, they look Indians to me , more than Negroic African, or like African mulatos, than the typical "pure" Negros.

I think all Africans, except few pockets have been influenced by an influx of people returning into Africa, not only AE. Of course Egypt is the door to Africa, that is why it is more evident there. According to the National geopgraphic site, there was influx back to Africa, during the ice age and after.

And please every one don't bring the bust of Painkhy, the Nubian and call it of Menes, or bring the two blackest dynasties of Egypt's pictures, and say this is the whole of Egypt, upper and lower and all through its pharonic history that is how they look.

---

Posts: 2688 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Supercar:
The challenge was put forward before:

Where is the evidence?......

...but nobody was up for the challenge then; maybe it will be a different story this time around.

---

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

*What constitutes a 'pure' African versus an African of 'mixed' non African ancestry??

Answer: No one is truly ‘pure’ because all humans originated from Africa. Because of this fact, indigenous African populations possess the greatest genetic and phenotypic diversity in the world in a number of features such as skin complexion, cranial features, and hair form, but ALL are adapted to tropical to subtropical climate.

Skin color:
Hum Biol. 2000 Oct;72(5):773-80. Related Articles, Links
Human skin color diversity is highest in sub-Saharan African populations.
Relethford JH.
Department of Anthropology, State University of New York College at Oneonta, 13820, USA.
Previous studies of genetic and craniometric traits have found higher levels of within-population diversity in sub-Saharan Africa compared to other geographic regions. This study examines regional differences in within-population diversity of human skin color. Published data on skin reflectance were collected for 98 male samples from eight geographic regions: sub-Saharan Africa, North Africa, Europe, West Asia, Southwest Asia, South Asia, Australasia, and the New World. Regional differences in local within-population diversity were examined using two measures of variability: the sample variance and the sample coefficient of variation. For both measures, the average level of within-population diversity is higher in sub-Saharan Africa than in other geographic regions. This difference persists even after adjusting for a correlation between within-population diversity and distance from the equator. Though affected by natural selection, skin color variation shows the same pattern of higher African diversity as found with other traits.

African skin complexions range from almost jet-black along the equator to yellowish-brown just outside the tropical latitudes which are the sub-tropical zones. With some North African Berber groups living just north of the tropic of Cancer and South African Khoisan groups living just south of the tropic of Capricorn.

Khoisan


Hair form:
Hair form naturally varies among indigenous Africans so not all Africans have the ‘kinky’ type hair form found among the stereotypical African. Hair can range from wavy to the spiral tuft form found among the Khoisan peoples of southern Africa. The ‘kinky’ type seems to be in between these extremes. Even outside of Africa, those indigenous black populations who remained in the tropics also maintained this diversity inherited from their African ancestors. Although of note, wavy hair found among Africans tends to be thicker than the wavy hair seen among Eurasians.

American Anthropological Association Statement on "race"

Physical variations in any given trait tend to occur gradually rather than abruptly over geographic areas. And because physical traits are inherited independently of one another, knowing the range of one trait does not predict the presence of others. For example, skin color varies largely from light in the temperate areas in the north to dark in the tropical areas in the south; its intensity is not related to nose shape or hair texture. Dark skin may be associated with frizzy or kinky hair or curly or wavy or straight hair, all of which are found among different indigenous peoples in tropical regions. These facts render any attempt to establish lines of division among biological populations both arbitrary and subjective.

Cranial features:
The human phenotypic trait that holds the greatest diversity is cranial morphology. Because of this fact, cranial features can at times be misleading if not taken into proper context. For example, for a long time features like long narrow faces and narrow noses have been associated with “caucasian” or “caucasoid” people even though such features are present in populations throughout the globe from Africa to the Americas. The same can be said about so-called “negroid” features such as broad faces and noses which are also not just confined to Africans but various peoples in Asia, the Pacific etc.

Which is why we have studies like this:

J. Edwards, A. Leathers, et al.
...based on Howell’s sampling Fordisc 2.0 authors state that "there are no races, only populations," yet it is clear that Howell was intent on providing known groups that would be distributed among the continental "racial" groups.
We tested the accuracy and effectiveness of Fordisc 2.0 using twelve cranial measurements from a homogeneous population from the X-Group period of Sudanese Nubia (350CE-550CE). When the Fordisc program classified the adult X-Group crania, only 51 (57.3%) of 89 individuals were classified within groups from Africa. Others were placed in such diverse groups as Polynesian (11.24%), European (7.86%), Japanese (4.49%), Native American (3.37%), Peruvian (3.36%), Australian (1.12), Tasmanian (1.12%), and Melanesian (1.12%). The implications of these findings suggest that classifying populations, whether by geography or by "race", is not morphologically or biologically accurate because of the wide variation even in homogeneous populations.

And...

Forensic Misclassification of
Ancient Nubian Crania:
Implications for Assumptions
about Human Variation -April 2005, Current Anthropology:

It is well known that human biological variation is principally clinal (i.e., structured as gradients) and not racial (i.e., structured as a small number of fairly discrete
groups). We have shown that for a temporally and geographically homogeneous East African population, the most widely used “racial”
program fails to identify the skeletal material accurately. The assignment of skeletal racial origin is based principally upon stereotypical features found most frequently in the most geographically distant populations. While this is useful in some contexts (for example, sorting
skeletal material of largely West African ancestry
from skeletal material of largely Western European ancestry), it fails to identify populations that originate elsewhere and misrepresents fundamental patterns of human biological diversity.

These exact same mistakes were made in classifying Egyptian skulls and is also the reason you hear these old studies speak of a percentage of “Caucasoid” and even a percentage of “mongoloid” skulls!

Jean Hiernaux
The People of Africa(Peoples of the World Series) 1975
The oldest remains of Homo sapiens sapiens found in East Africa were associated with an industry having similarities with the Capsian. It has been called Upper Kenyan Capsian, although its derivation from the North African Capsian is far from certain. At Gamble's Cave in Kenya, five human skeletons were associated with a late phase of the industry, Upper Kenya Capsian C, which contains pottery. A similar associationis presumed for a skeleton found at Olduvai, which resembles those from Gamble's Cave. The date of Upper Kenya Capsian C is not precisely known (an earlier phase from Prospect Farm on Eburru Mountain close to Gamble's Cave has been dated to about 8000 BC); but the presence of pottery indicates a rather later date, perhaps around 400 BC. The skeletons are of very tall people. They had long, narrow heads, and relatively long, narrow faces. The nose was of medium width; and prognathism, when present, was restricted to the alveolar, or tooth-bearing, region......all their features can be found in several living populations of East Africa, like the Tutsi of Rwanda and Burundi, who are very dark skinned and differ greatly from Europeans in a number of body proportions.............
From the foregoing, it is tempting to locate the area of differentiation of these people in the interior of East Africa. There is every reason to believe that they are ancestral to the living 'Elongated East Africans'. Neither of these populations, fossil and modern, should be considered to be closely related to the populations of Europe and western Asia.

claims that Caucasoid peoples once lived in eastern Africa have been
shown to be wrong, - JO Vogel, Precolonial Africa.

So features like narrow faces and noses do NOT indicate foreign ancestry or ‘admixture’.

Fulani (West African)


Somali (East African)


Egyptian (North African)


Tutsi (Central African)


Ironically, another trait all of these people above share in common besides facial features is skeletal structure of their bodies. Their body structure has been called “super-negroid” indicating their extra-tropical adapted bodies compared to stereotypical blacks of West Africa who only have plain “negroid” builds. This is another indication that these people definitely have NO non-African ancestry!

Also, just because someone happens to have the same features as those you consider ‘true blacks (negroes)’ does not mean they are even African. As seen by this Andamanese person below.



Jean Hiernaux The People of Africa 1975
p.53, 54

"In sub-Saharan Africa, many anthropological characters show a wide range of population means or frequencies. In some of them, the whole world range is covered in the sub-continent. Here live the shortest and the tallest human populations, the one with the highest and the one with the lowest nose, the one with the thickest and the one with the thinnest lips in the world. In this area, the range of the average nose widths covers 92 per cent of the world range:

only a narrow range of extremely low means are absent from the African record. Means for head diameters cover about 80 per cent of the world range; 60 per cent is the corresponding value for a variable once cherished by physical anthropologists, the cephalic index, or ratio of the head width to head length expressed as a percentage....."

So all this talk of such peoples being “not black” and “mixed” because of certain looks is downright silly... And why there really are no 'races' because most of human diversity *comes from Africans*.

---

Posts: 26397 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
*sigh* I don't know if you guys remember, but Amnesiac AMR posted this exact same topic twice before. As usual, his goal is to "mix up" 'Nubians' also.

His knowledge or lack there of on indigenous African peoples for one who comes from Africa is so pathetic it's almost humorous.

He speaks of "pure" Africans only having jet-black skin and kinky hair despite everything he's heard in the past couple of years on this forum! But that's why I call him Amnesiac, because no matter what you tell him or how much information you show to him, his mixed-up mind will just forget everything and he'll come back the next day (sometimes the next hour) repeating the same nonsense.

But for all you intelligent folks here it is (again):

quote:

---

*What constitutes a 'pure' African versus an African of 'mixed' non African ancestry??

Answer: No one is truly ‘pure’ because all humans originated from Africa. Because of this fact, indigenous African populations possess the greatest genetic and phenotypic diversity in the world in a number of features such as skin complexion, cranial features, and hair form, but ALL are adapted to tropical to subtropical climate.

Skin color:
Hum Biol. 2000 Oct;72(5):773-80. Related Articles, Links
Human skin color diversity is highest in sub-Saharan African populations.
Relethford JH.
Department of Anthropology, State University of New York College at Oneonta, 13820, USA.
Previous studies of genetic and craniometric traits have found higher levels of within-population diversity in sub-Saharan Africa compared to other geographic regions. This study examines regional differences in within-population diversity of human skin color. Published data on skin reflectance were collected for 98 male samples from eight geographic regions: sub-Saharan Africa, North Africa, Europe, West Asia, Southwest Asia, South Asia, Australasia, and the New World. Regional differences in local within-population diversity were examined using two measures of variability: the sample variance and the sample coefficient of variation. For both measures, the average level of within-population diversity is higher in sub-Saharan Africa than in other geographic regions. This difference persists even after adjusting for a correlation between within-population diversity and distance from the equator. Though affected by natural selection, skin color variation shows the same pattern of higher African diversity as found with other traits.

African skin complexions range from almost jet-black along the equator to yellowish-brown just outside the tropical latitudes which are the sub-tropical zones. With some North African Berber groups living just north of the tropic of Cancer and South African Khoisan groups living just south of the tropic of Capricorn.

Khoisan


Hair form:
Hair form naturally varies among indigenous Africans so not all Africans have the ‘kinky’ type hair form found among the stereotypical African. Hair can range from wavy to the spiral tuft form found among the Khoisan peoples of southern Africa. The ‘kinky’ type seems to be in between these extremes. Even outside of Africa, those indigenous black populations who remained in the tropics also maintained this diversity inherited from their African ancestors. Although of note, wavy hair found among Africans tends to be thicker than the wavy hair seen among Eurasians.

American Anthropological Association Statement on "race"

Physical variations in any given trait tend to occur gradually rather than abruptly over geographic areas. And because physical traits are inherited independently of one another, knowing the range of one trait does not predict the presence of others. For example, skin color varies largely from light in the temperate areas in the north to dark in the tropical areas in the south; its intensity is not related to nose shape or hair texture. Dark skin may be associated with frizzy or kinky hair or curly or wavy or straight hair, all of which are found among different indigenous peoples in tropical regions. These facts render any attempt to establish lines of division among biological populations both arbitrary and subjective.

Cranial features:
The human phenotypic trait that holds the greatest diversity is cranial morphology. Because of this fact, cranial features can at times be misleading if not taken into proper context. For example, for a long time features like long narrow faces and narrow noses have been associated with “caucasian” or “caucasoid” people even though such features are present in populations throughout the globe from Africa to the Americas. The same can be said about so-called “negroid” features such as broad faces and noses which are also not just confined to Africans but various peoples in Asia, the Pacific etc.

Which is why we have studies like this:

J. Edwards, A. Leathers, et al.
...based on Howell’s sampling Fordisc 2.0 authors state that "there are no races, only populations," yet it is clear that Howell was intent on providing known groups that would be distributed among the continental "racial" groups.
We tested the accuracy and effectiveness of Fordisc 2.0 using twelve cranial measurements from a homogeneous population from the X-Group period of Sudanese Nubia (350CE-550CE). When the Fordisc program classified the adult X-Group crania, only 51 (57.3%) of 89 individuals were classified within groups from Africa. Others were placed in such diverse groups as Polynesian (11.24%), European (7.86%), Japanese (4.49%), Native American (3.37%), Peruvian (3.36%), Australian (1.12), Tasmanian (1.12%), and Melanesian (1.12%). The implications of these findings suggest that classifying populations, whether by geography or by "race", is not morphologically or biologically accurate because of the wide variation even in homogeneous populations.

And...

Forensic Misclassification of
Ancient Nubian Crania:
Implications for Assumptions
about Human Variation -April 2005, Current Anthropology:

It is well known that human biological variation is principally clinal (i.e., structured as gradients) and not racial (i.e., structured as a small number of fairly discrete
groups). We have shown that for a temporally and geographically homogeneous East African population, the most widely used “racial”
program fails to identify the skeletal material accurately. The assignment of skeletal racial origin is based principally upon stereotypical features found most frequently in the most geographically distant populations. While this is useful in some contexts (for example, sorting
skeletal material of largely West African ancestry
from skeletal material of largely Western European ancestry), it fails to identify populations that originate elsewhere and misrepresents fundamental patterns of human biological diversity.

These exact same mistakes were made in classifying Egyptian skulls and is also the reason you hear these old studies speak of a percentage of “Caucasoid” and even a percentage of “mongoloid” skulls!

Jean Hiernaux
The People of Africa(Peoples of the World Series) 1975
The oldest remains of Homo sapiens sapiens found in East Africa were associated with an industry having similarities with the Capsian. It has been called Upper Kenyan Capsian, although its derivation from the North African Capsian is far from certain. At Gamble's Cave in Kenya, five human skeletons were associated with a late phase of the industry, Upper Kenya Capsian C, which contains pottery. A similar associationis presumed for a skeleton found at Olduvai, which resembles those from Gamble's Cave. The date of Upper Kenya Capsian C is not precisely known (an earlier phase from Prospect Farm on Eburru Mountain close to Gamble's Cave has been dated to about 8000 BC); but the presence of pottery indicates a rather later date, perhaps around 400 BC. The skeletons are of very tall people. They had long, narrow heads, and relatively long, narrow faces. The nose was of medium width; and prognathism, when present, was restricted to the alveolar, or tooth-bearing, region......all their features can be found in several living populations of East Africa, like the Tutsi of Rwanda and Burundi, who are very dark skinned and differ greatly from Europeans in a number of body proportions.............
From the foregoing, it is tempting to locate the area of differentiation of these people in the interior of East Africa. There is every reason to believe that they are ancestral to the living 'Elongated East Africans'. Neither of these populations, fossil and modern, should be considered to be closely related to the populations of Europe and western Asia.

claims that Caucasoid peoples once lived in eastern Africa have been
shown to be wrong, - JO Vogel, Precolonial Africa.

So features like narrow faces and noses do NOT indicate foreign ancestry or ‘admixture’.

Fulani (West African)


Somali (East African)


Egyptian (North African)


Tutsi (Central African)


Ironically, another trait all of these people above share in common besides facial features is skeletal structure of their bodies. Their body structure has been called “super-negroid” indicating their extra-tropical adapted bodies compared to stereotypical blacks of West Africa who only have plain “negroid” builds. This is another indication that these people definitely have NO non-African ancestry!

Also, just because someone happens to have the same features as those you consider ‘true blacks (negroes)’ does not mean they are even African. As seen by this Andamanese person below.



Jean Hiernaux The People of Africa 1975
p.53, 54

"In sub-Saharan Africa, many anthropological characters show a wide range of population means or frequencies. In some of them, the whole world range is covered in the sub-continent. Here live the shortest and the tallest human populations, the one with the highest and the one with the lowest nose, the one with the thickest and the one with the thinnest lips in the world. In this area, the range of the average nose widths covers 92 per cent of the world range:

only a narrow range of extremely low means are absent from the African record. Means for head diameters cover about 80 per cent of the world range; 60 per cent is the corresponding value for a variable once cherished by physical anthropologists, the cephalic index, or ratio of the head width to head length expressed as a percentage....."

So all this talk of such peoples being “not black” and “mixed” because of certain looks is downright silly... And why there really are no 'races' because most of human diversity *comes from Africans*.

---

---

Posts: 1090 | From: Merowe-Nubia | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

^ The color dialectic of the self hating pseudo Arabs of Sudan, which is the legasy of the conquest of kememou by the deshretu.

Sudani Arabs are white.

Southern Sudanese are blue.

Keme - Black - has now been completely annihilated from the discourse.

---

Yes. In [northern] Sudan, the label 'black' is reserved only for the lowest caste of society-- slaves, as well as non-Muslim Africans. Other color words are used to describe the other groups.

http://www.yale.edu/glc/events/cbss/Deng.pdf

The first color in rank is asfar. This literally means “yellow,” but is used interchangeably with ahmar to denote “whiteness.” The second is asmar. This literally means reddish, but it is used interchangeably to describe a range of color shades from light to dark brown… The third in ranking is akhdar. This literally means green, but it is used as a polite alternative to the word “black.” Last and least is azrag to mean “black,” which is the color of abid, (slave)… In order to avoid describing self as aswad (black), the collective Northern consciousness renamed the akhdar (green)… Whereas a very dark Northerner is only akhdar, an equally dark Southerner is bluntly aswad (black).

The Janjaweed are no different in complexion from the people they are killing and driving away, but because they are 'Arabs', they are called "green" while their victims are "blue"!!

Such is the mixed-up (f**ked) mentality of Arabized mind (including you know who)!

You can read more of this awful situation here.

Posts: 26397 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tee85:

Is it a law of nature/the universe for "black" and "white to not get along????

The "yin and yang" symbol is Black and white. it's suppose to represent opposites.

Ancient Egyptians viwed Black as complete, perfect, whites did not. Whites thought/think Whites represnt purity, and wear BLACK at funerals. So forth and so on.

---

Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by HIPHOP (a.k.a. Herukhuti):
Has anyone been to stormfront.org lately? oh my God, those guys are COLD.

I read a bunch of threads there and I gained much insight into the mind of the 'white' racist.

I can't believe we are busy arguing about what is black or brown (or whatever) when there are people out there who WISH to wipe OFF THE PLANET anyone who isn't 'white' ('mixed' people will not be spared).

Fellow humans, we have a long way to go. Hopefully, it won't be too late before we get there. Seek (financial) POWER people, there is a time for everything. It's not a time to chill & reflect, it's defo time to bossup.

Peace to all.

p.s. Here's something from stormfront for y'all to meditate on...

Whites will always innovate
Asians always imitate
Browns will always inundate
Blacks will never appreciate
Jews forever aggravate

---

Posts: 477 | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

quote:

---

I think all Africans, except few pockets have been influenced by an influx of people returning into Africa, not only AE.

---

If so, then the AE would be like all other Africans so how would that help you?

And sense all non-Africans descend from Africans....and Europeans and Arabs are mixed with Africans subsequently, what would be your point?

quote:

---

And please every one don't bring the bust of Painkhy, the Nubian and call it of Menes

---

You mean this bust from the 1st dynasty of Abydos:



Please cite a source other than Arthur Kemp - stormfront white supremacist - who makes the claim that the above is a a 25th dynasty sculpture.

In other words, please cite a source that won't end up humiliating you, again.

---

Posts: 477 | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Supercar:
The challenge was put forward before:

Where is the evidence?......

...but nobody was up for the challenge then; maybe it will be a different story this time around.

---

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged |