posted
Below i present some solid evidence that ancient egypt was a Caucasoid civilization.
Indigenous races of tropical environments have a low intelligence
Races of tropical climate have a low intelligence. At least one factor for this is because of their diet. Races of the tropics never developed advanced cognitive thinking like the inhabitants of Eurasia.
''People in tropical and subtropical latitudes were never greatly reliant for their food supply on the hunting of animals for meat is supported by observations on contemporary hunter gatherers. Many non-cultivating populations living in tropical and subtropical environments subsist largely on plant foods of which numerous species are available throughout the year (Lee, 1968; Tooby and de yore, 1987). The ready availability of plant foods throughout the year, together with insects and eggs, meant that people in tropical and subtropical Africa never had to rely on meat for their food supply and did not come under strong selection pressure to develop the cognitive skills required to hunt large animals.'' - Richard Lynn, ''The evolution of racial differences in intelligence'', Mankind Quarterly, Fall/Winter91, Vol. 32 Issue 1/2, p99,
Survival in the cold winters of Eurasia would surely have required an increase in all the three major components of intelligence, namely general, verbal and visuospatial ability. Hunting and tool making would have been undertaken principally by males and this would be why it has virtually always been found that the visuospatial abilities are stronger in males than in females (Lynn and Petersen, 1986).
Eurasians however (Caucasoids and Mongoloids) developed a greater intelligence as they hunted animals but also because they had to improve their intelligence to adapt to the more northern latitudes (which had far more problems). Thus as Lynn further notes (Ibid.):
''Caucasoid and Mongoloid peoples who evolved in Eurasia came to occupy a new niche which exerted selection pressure for improved intelligence to deal with the problems of survival in the cold northern latitudes''.
What this simply means is that ancient egyptian civilization had to have originated with people from Eurasia, not indigenous to Africa.
Ancient egyptian civilization was clearly started by Caucasoids moving into Africa.
Native races of tropical climate have low IQ's and so could not have been responsible for creating Egypt.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: Below i present some solid evidence that ancient egypt was a Caucasoid civilization.
Indigenous races of tropical environments have a low intelligence
Races of tropical climate have a low intelligence. At least one factor for this is because of their diet. Races of the tropics never developed advanced cognitive thinking like the inhabitants of Eurasia.
''People in tropical and subtropical latitudes were never greatly reliant for their food supply on the hunting of animals for meat is supported by observations on contemporary hunter gatherers. Many non-cultivating populations living in tropical and subtropical environments subsist largely on plant foods of which numerous species are available throughout the year (Lee, 1968; Tooby and de yore, 1987). The ready availability of plant foods throughout the year, together with insects and eggs, meant that people in tropical and subtropical Africa never had to rely on meat for their food supply and did not come under strong selection pressure to develop the cognitive skills required to hunt large animals.'' - Richard Lynn, ''The evolution of racial differences in intelligence'', Mankind Quarterly, Fall/Winter91, Vol. 32 Issue 1/2, p99,
Survival in the cold winters of Eurasia would surely have required an increase in all the three major components of intelligence, namely general, verbal and visuospatial ability. Hunting and tool making would have been undertaken principally by males and this would be why it has virtually always been found that the visuospatial abilities are stronger in males than in females (Lynn and Petersen, 1986).
Eurasians however (Caucasoids and Mongoloids) developed a greater intelligence as they hunted animals but also because they had to improve their intelligence to adapt to the more northern latitudes (which had far more problems). Thus as Lynn further notes (Ibid.):
''Caucasoid and Mongoloid peoples who evolved in Eurasia came to occupy a new niche which exerted selection pressure for improved intelligence to deal with the problems of survival in the cold northern latitudes''.
What this simply means is that ancient egyptian civilization had to have originated with people from Eurasia, not indigenous to Africa.
Native races of tropical climate have low IQ's and so could not have been responsible for creating Egypt.
ha hahah ahah ahahahahahahah.. Even aside from the fact that Richard Lynn is a racist and that his "Mankind Quarterly" is a racist, Pioneer Fund supported publication, on the factual merits the claim is complete nonsense. Is this bogus “biodiversity” crap all you got? Hapless dolt.. let us school you again in a few clicks with data that debunked your idiotic claims long ago..
CLAIM 1: “HUNTING” ACTIVITIES LEADS TO ADVANCED COGNITION AND CIVILIZATION. - Result when examined- BULLSHIIT.
The “white hunting hypothesis” is facile nonsense. Peoples like the Pygmies rely heavily on hunting, as do Nilotics like the Dorobo, and even so-called “agricultural” peoples in Eastern and southern Africa. The Inuit people of the Artic regions also hunt heavily. But neither they or Pygmies have produced advanced material civilizations, contradicting the bogus “biodiversity” claim.
Sub-tropical peoples in Mesopotamia also did quite a bit of hunting, contrary to Lynn’s claims. And the whole "non-hunting" tropical/sub-tropical meme is debunked by the hunting activities of numerous tropical and sub-tropical peoples in the Americas. Even more devastating, Australian Aborigines make a heavy living doing hunting, yet did not produce advanced material civilization which should have occurred under the "biodiversity" "hunting hypothesis."
In short, your claim is the usual bullshiit, and Richard Lynn is an ignoramus when it comes to basic anthropology. He is too busy spinning a bogus tale of "virtuous Caucasoids" versus "backward tropicals/sub-tropicals" to be taken seriously.
Supposedly “more advanced” cold climate Caucasoid hunters failed to progress beyond the stone age in their first time at bat.
Cold-climate hunting experts- the Inuit, failed to produce advanced civilization debunking Lynn’s nonsense claims
CLAIM 2- BECAUSE OF THE ALLEGED “COGNITIVE CHALLENGES” CAUSED BY COLD CLIMATE ADAPTATION, “ADVANCED” PEOPLE EVOLVED. Result when examined - BULLSHIIT.
If so, why did the “advanced” whites fail in Europe and why did they take so long and had to copy non-white peoples to finally begin civilization in the second round?[/b]
Let’s begin by taking a look at the first white Europeans who hunted very heavily and evolved in cold climates. Using it, we see then that the first whites were cold-adapted Neanderthals that failed to progress beyond the Stone Age despite a sometimes favorable environment with rich resources available (Lewin 1994). Ice Age Europe was not a cold hell but had variable climate and rich forest, woodland and aquatic resources, including ancient variants of wheat-like spelt and chick peas in place that could have been domesticated, along with ancestors of sheep, cattle and pigs, and a favorable East-West climatic axis that could have aided domestication.
Despite tens of thousands of years with these advantages and resources however, white lineages failed to move beyond the Stone Age.
Dead end white cold-climate lineages evolved in Europe. Africa went on to produce anatomically modern humans.
Next are the early post-Neanderthal successors of Neanderthals. They too, despite plenty of "hunting" and "cold climates" failed to produce advanced material civilzations. Instead such civilizations sprang from the tropical and sub-tropical zone. Cold climate white Europeans borrowed and copied extensively from tropical and sub-tropical peoples, failing to create the advances and innovations crucial to advanced civ, writing, metallurgy, plant and animal domestication, powered machinery, agriculture etc etc.. In short, the first touted "white hunting Caucasoids" failed to produced the advanced civilization, and the record of later "cold climate white Caucasoids" also failed to independently produce advanced civilization.
CLAIM 3: DUE TO COLD CLIMATE, THERE WUZ HIGHER WHITE IQs WHICH PRODUCED ADVANCED CIVILIZATIONS. Results when Examined- BULLSHIIT.
wrapup: Summary
1) Southern Egypt, from which the genesis of Ancient Egypt civilization sprang, lies in the tropical zone, from the Tropics of Cancer to Capricorn. The rest of Egypt is very similar, and lies in the immediately adjacent subtropical or arid tropic zone, NOT the cold-climate zones of Europe or Asia. (Thompson and Perry, 1997; Griffiths, 1976)
2) The peoples of ancient Egypt, in the aforementioned tropical and semi-tropical/arid tropic zones, show clear limb proportion characteristics of tropically adapted people, and MORE closely resemble other tropically adapted Africans on the continent, than Europeans or Middle Easterners. (Raxter and Ruff 2008, Zakrewski 2003, 2007; Holliday et al, 2003, Kemp, 2005)
3) Undermining claims of cold-climate or skin color primacy for civilization, the great ancient Nile Valley civilization arose from the 'darker' more tropical south, NOT the cold climate or cool climate Mediterranean, Europe or Asia. (Clark, 1982; Shaw 1976, 2003; Bard, 2004; Vogel, 1997; Kemp 2005)
4) The ancient Egyptians in their tropical and sub-tropical/arid tropic environment, did not need cold climate people to develop their distinct culture. Several strands of culture from religion to material living put the Egyptians closer to nearby Africans than to cold-climate Mediterraneans, Europeans or Asiatics. (Keita, 1996, 2004; Yurco 1989, 1996; Williams, 1980; Britannia 1984; Wilkinson 1999; Wendorf, 2001)
5) European/Asiatic cold climate or light skin inspiration was unneeded by the tropically adapted Africans of ancient Egypt. They peopled the Nile Valley from the Sahara and the Sudan, and ancient Egypt is part of a tropical African lineage. Indigenous development sprang from a long tradition going back deep into the Sahara and the Sudan. (Lovell, 1999; Lefkowitz, 1993, 1996; Keita 1993, Irish 2006)
6) European/Asiatic cold climate or light skin inspiration was unneeded by the tropically adapted Africans of ancient Egypt. DNA studies show the Egyptians link with other Africans via Haplogroup "E" to a much greater extent than cold climate Mediterraneans, Europeans or Middle easterners. (Keita 2004, 2008; Richards 2003; Battaglia, 2008; Cruciani 2007; Lucotte 2003; Stevanovitch et al 2004)
7) African people have a range of physical variation and don't need any inspiration or mixes from cold-climate/light skinned Europeans or Asiatics to explain why. Features like narrow noses, thin lips, height etc are all indigenous to Africa. Africa has both the highest phenotypic diversity and the highest genetic diversity in the world and don’t need cold-climate/light skin inspiration for that established fact. All cold-climate/light skinned Europeans and Asiatics are SUBSETS of original African diversity. Modern DNA studies find even though some African peoples look different, they are genetically related through the PN2 transition clade of the Y-chromosome. Thus light-skinned African Libyans and dark-skinned Zulus are all genetically related Africans, even though they don't look exactly the same. (Keita 2004; Tishkoff 2002, Ely et al, 2006, Stevanovitch 2004)
8) African peoples are the most diverse in the world whether analyzed by DNA or skeletal or cranial methods. The peoples of the Nile Valley vary but they are still related. The people most related ethnically to the ancient Egyptians are other Africans like Nubians not cold-climate/light skinned Europeans or Asiatics. (Keita 1996; Rethelford, 2001; Bianchi 2004, Yurco 1989; Godde 2009)
9) Not needing cold-climate/slight-skinned inspiration, the peoples of ancient Egypt are more closely linked with fellow tropical Africans in terms of cranial studies than with Europeans or Asiatics. Analysis of skeletal and cranial remains reveals that the ancient Egyptians of the early Dynastic and pre-Dynastic phases, link closer to nearby Saharan, Sudanic and East African populations than Mediterranean and Middle Eastern peoples. Greeks, Romans, Hyskos, Arabs and others were to appear later in Egyptian history. Craniometric studies generally place ancient Upper Egyptian populations closer to the range of tropical Africans in the Nile Valley and East Africa than to Mediterraneans, or Middle Easterners. (Keita 1990, 1993, 1996, 2004; Hiernaux 1975; Froment 2002; Kemp 2005)
10) Comparatively recent (in evolutionary terms) Europeans and Asiatics LOOKED LIKE tropical Africans with dark skin and other features, before cold-climate adaptation changed them. Light skin color is a RECENT development for Europeans and Asiatics. The foundations of civilization in terms of key animal and plant domesticates, and associated technology in Europe and Asia were thus laid by these dark-skinned migrants from Africa, who resembled today's Africans, undermining claims of the efficacy of white skin in laying the basic foundations or in building advanced civilizations such as that built by the tropically adapted peoples of the Nile Valley. (Jablonski 2000; Brace 2005; Hanihara 1996; Rethelford 2000)
End of today’s lesson..
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
SUMMARY recap for the archives- Tropical peoples produced one of the world's most advanced civilizations
1) Southern Egypt, from which the genesis of Ancient Egypt civilization sprang, lies in the tropical zone. The Tropic of Cancer passes through Egypt at 23°26′N 25°0′E. The rest of Egypt lies in the subtropical or arid tropic zone, NOT the cold-climate zones of Europe or Asia.
2) The peoples of ancient Egypt, in the aforementioned tropical and semi-tropical/arid tropic zones show clear limb proportion characteristics of tropically adapted people, and MORE closely resemble other tropically adapted Africans on the continent, than Europeans or Middle Easterners.
3) Undermining claims of cold-climate or skin color primacy for civilization, the great ancient Nile Valley civilization arose from the 'darker' more tropical south, NOT the cold climate or cool climate Mediterranean, Europe or Asia.
4) The ancient Egyptians in their tropical and sub-tropical/arid tropic environment, did not need cold climate people to develop their distinct culture. Several strands of culture from religion to material living put the ancient Egyptians closer to nearby Africans than to cold-climate Mediterraneans, Europeans or Asiatics.
5) European/Asiatic cold climate or light skin inspiration was unneeded by the tropically adapted Africans of ancient Egypt. They peopled the Nile Valley from the Sahara, and ancient Egypt is part of a tropical African lineage. Indigenous development sprang from a long tradition going back deep into the Sahara and the Sudan.
6) European/Asiatic cold climate or light skin inspiration was unneeded by the tropically adapted Africans of ancient Egypt. DNA studies show the Egyptians link with other Africans via Haplogroup "E" to a much greater extent than cold climate Mediterraneans, Europeans or Middle easterners.
7) African people have a range of physical variation and don't need any inspiration or mixes from cold-climate/light skinned Europeans or Asiatics to explain why. Features like narrow noses, thin lips, height etc are all indigenous to Africa. Africa has both the highest phenotypic diversity and the highest genetic diversity in the world and don’t need cold-climate/light skin inspiration for that established fact. All cold-climate/light skinned Europeans and Asiatics are SUBSETS of original African diversity. Modern DNA studies find even though some African peoples look different, they are genetically related through the PN2 transition clade of the Y-chromosome. Thus light-skinned African Libyans and dark-skinned Zulus are all genetically related Africans ,even though they don't look exactly the same.
8) African peoples are the most diverse in the world whether analyzed by DNA or skeletal or cranial methods. The peoples of the Nile Valley vary but they are still related. The people most related ethnically to the ancient Egyptians are other Africans like Nubians not cold-climate/light skinned Europeans or Asiatics.
9) Not needing cold-climate/slight-skinned inspiration, the peoples of ancient Egypt are more closely linked with fellow tropical Africans in terms of cranial studies than with Europeans or Asiatics. Analysis of skeletal and cranial remains reveals that the ancient Egyptians of the early Dynastic and pre-Dynastic phases, link closer to nearby Saharan, Sudanic and East African populations than Mediterranean and Middle Eastern peoples. Greeks, Romans, Hyskos, Arabs and others were to appear later in Egyptian history. Craniometric studies generally place ancient Upper Egyptian populations closer to the range of tropical Africans in the Nile Valley and East Africa than to Mediterraneans, or Middle Easterners.
10) Comparatively recent (in evolutionary terms) Europeans and Asiatics LOOKED LIKE tropical Africans with dark skin and other features before cold-climate adaptation changed them. Light skin color is a recent development for Europeans and Asiatics. The key foundations of civilization in terms of key animal and plant domesticates and associated technology in Europe and Asia were thus laid by these dark-skinned migrants from Africa, undermining claims of the efficacy of white skin in laying the basic foundations or in building advanced civilizations such as that built by the tropically adapted peoples of the Nile Valley.
======================
SUMMARY WITH SCHOLARLY REFERENCES
1) Southern Egypt, from which the genesis of Ancient Egypt civilization sprang, lies in the tropical zone, from the Tropics of Cancer to Capricorn. The rest of Egypt is very similar, and lies in the immediately adjacent subtropical or arid tropic zone, NOT the cold-climate zones of Europe or Asia. (Thompson and Perry, 1997; Griffiths, 1976)
2) The peoples of ancient Egypt, in the aforementioned tropical and semi-tropical/arid tropic zones, show clear limb proportion characteristics of tropically adapted people, and MORE closely resemble other tropically adapted Africans on the continent, than Europeans or Middle Easterners. (Raxter and Ruff 2008, Zakrewski 2003, 2007; Holliday et al, 2003, Kemp, 2005)
3) Undermining claims of cold-climate or skin color primacy for civilization, the great ancient Nile Valley civilization arose from the 'darker' more tropical south, NOT the cold climate or cool climate Mediterranean, Europe or Asia. (Clark, 1982; Shaw 1976, 2003; Bard, 2004; Vogel, 1997; Kemp 2005)
4) The ancient Egyptians in their tropical and sub-tropical/arid tropic environment, did not need cold climate people to develop their distinct culture. Several strands of culture from religion to material living put the Egyptians closer to nearby Africans than to cold-climate Mediterraneans, Europeans or Asiatics. (Keita, 1996, 2004; Yurco 1989, 1996; Williams, 1980; Britannia 1984; Wilkinson 1999; Wendorf, 2001)
5) European/Asiatic cold climate or light skin inspiration was unneeded by the tropically adapted Africans of ancient Egypt. They peopled the Nile Valley from the Sahara and the Sudan, and ancient Egypt is part of a tropical African lineage. Indigenous development sprang from a long tradition going back deep into the Sahara and the Sudan. (Lovell, 1999; Lefkowitz, 1993, 1996; Keita 1993, Irish 2006)
6) European/Asiatic cold climate or light skin inspiration was unneeded by the tropically adapted Africans of ancient Egypt. DNA studies show the Egyptians link with other Africans via Haplogroup "E" to a much greater extent than cold climate Mediterraneans, Europeans or Middle easterners. (Keita 2004, 2008; Richards 2003; Battaglia, 2008; Cruciani 2007; Lucotte 2003; Stevanovitch et al 2004)
7) African people have a range of physical variation and don't need any inspiration or mixes from cold-climate/light skinned Europeans or Asiatics to explain why. Features like narrow noses, thin lips, height etc are all indigenous to Africa. Africa has both the highest phenotypic diversity and the highest genetic diversity in the world and don’t need cold-climate/light skin inspiration for that established fact. All cold-climate/light skinned Europeans and Asiatics are SUBSETS of original African diversity. Modern DNA studies find even though some African peoples look different, they are genetically related through the PN2 transition clade of the Y-chromosome. Thus light-skinned African Libyans and dark-skinned Zulus are all genetically related Africans, even though they don't look exactly the same. (Keita 2004; Tishkoff 2002, Ely et al, 2006, Stevanovitch 2004)
8) African peoples are the most diverse in the world whether analyzed by DNA or skeletal or cranial methods. The peoples of the Nile Valley vary but they are still related. The people most related ethnically to the ancient Egyptians are other Africans like Nubians not cold-climate/light skinned Europeans or Asiatics. (Keita 1996; Rethelford, 2001; Bianchi 2004, Yurco 1989; Godde 2009)
9) Not needing cold-climate/slight-skinned inspiration, the peoples of ancient Egypt are more closely linked with fellow tropical Africans in terms of cranial studies than with Europeans or Asiatics. Analysis of skeletal and cranial remains reveals that the ancient Egyptians of the early Dynastic and pre-Dynastic phases, link closer to nearby Saharan, Sudanic and East African populations than Mediterranean and Middle Eastern peoples. Greeks, Romans, Hyskos, Arabs and others were to appear later in Egyptian history. Craniometric studies generally place ancient Upper Egyptian populations closer to the range of tropical Africans in the Nile Valley and East Africa than to Mediterraneans, or Middle Easterners. (Keita 1990, 1993, 1996, 2004; Hiernaux 1975; Froment 2002; Kemp 2005)
10) Comparatively recent (in evolutionary terms) Europeans and Asiatics LOOKED LIKE tropical Africans with dark skin and other features, before cold-climate adaptation changed them. Light skin color is a RECENT development for Europeans and Asiatics. The foundations of civilization in terms of key animal and plant domesticates, and associated technology in Europe and Asia were thus laid by these dark-skinned migrants from Africa, who resembled today's Africans, undermining claims of the efficacy of white skin in laying the basic foundations or in building advanced civilizations such as that built by the tropically adapted peoples of the Nile Valley. (Jablonski 2000; Brace 2005; Hanihara 1996; Rethelford 2000)
-------------------- Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began.. Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
War forces competition and thus increases cognitive skills.
From mixed martial arts to boxing, tropical Africans do quite well in terms of cognitive capabilities to fight.
The truth: high density population groups and enough agriculture to sustain that group results in selection pressure for specific personality types that are conducive to civilized constraints (high population social interations and policies). We call these personality traits high IQ but they are really a trade off from predatory fighting skills. It is the direct result of an environment'S ability to support a high density population that we see sudden jumps in IQ. For if it were true that hunting under extreme conditions made humans smart then the Native Americans (Whalers) would be the smartest or even possibily the inuit people (eskimos).
Summary: IQ is driven by slection pressures in a high density stable population. IQ of the Egyptians would have increased as the density of the population increased due to the dessert forcing more African groups into a bottleneck on the Nile river.
All the ancient civilizations are formed in environments that allowed for high density populations. Humans competiting with humans resulted in higher IQ. Neaderthals were likely better hunters but Homo Sapien could persist and grow numerous on agriculture and it is agriculture that resulted in civilizations which in turn created human competition that led to high IQ.
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Indigenous races of tropical environments have a low intelligence"
?
Is that nazi babble, suppose to be solid evidence?lol
Than what are the multiple peer reviewed scientific studies we have posted?lol
Most of this this castrated clown can't understand.
lol @ his caucasiod fantasies.
Here you have a body of evidence!
Nick A. Drakea,1, Roger M. Blenchb, Simon J. Armitagec, Charlie S. Bristowd, and Kevin H. Whitee
Department of Geography, King’s College London, Strand, London WC2R 2LS, United Kingdom; bKay Williamson Educational Foundation, 8 Guest Road, Cambridge CB1 2AL, United Kingdom; cDepartment of Geography, Royal Holloway, University of London, Egham, Surrey TW20 0EX, United Kingdom; dSchool of Earth Sciences, Birkbeck College, University of London, Malet Street, London WC1E 7HX, United Kingdom; and eDepartment of Geography, University of Reading, Whiteknights, Reading RG6 6AB, United Kingdom Edited by Ofer Bar-Yosef, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, and approved November 22, 2010 (received for review August 23, 2010)
Ancient watercourses and biogeography of the Sahara explain the peopling of the desert
Evidence increasingly suggests that sub-Saharan Africa is at the center of human evolution and understanding routes of dispersal “out of Africa” is thus becoming increasingly important. The Sahara Desert is considered by many to be an obstacle to these dispersals and a Nile corridor route has been proposed to cross it. Here we provide evidence that the Sahara was not an effective barrier and indicate how both animals and humans populated it during past humid phases. Analysis of the zoogeography of the Sahara shows that more animals crossed via this route than used the Nile corridor. Furthermore, many of these species are aquatic. This dis- persal was possible because during the Holocene humid period the region contained a series of linked lakes, rivers, and inland deltas comprising a large interlinked waterway, channeling water and an- imals into and across the Sahara, thus facilitating these dispersals. This system was last active in the early Holocene when many spe- cies appear to have occupied the entire Sahara. However, species that require deep water did not reach northern regions because of weak hydrological connections. Human dispersals were influenced by this distribution; Nilo-Saharan speakers hunting aquatic fauna with barbed bone points occupied the southern Sahara, while peo- ple hunting Savannah fauna with the bow and arrow spread south- ward. The dating of lacustrine sediments show that the “green Sahara” also existed during the last interglacial (∼125 ka) and pro- vided green corridors that could have formed dispersal routes at a likely time for the migration of modern humans out of Africa.
posted
I don't know why you folks even respond to these clowns. Seriously.
If Nordic Europe and Northern Asia were responsible for high cognitive abilities in humans, then why aren't the earliest evidence for "advanced" civilization found there? Last I checked, the earliest civilizations in East Asia started in the South. China is on the southern parts of the East Asian land mass, south of Korea and South of Japan. To the north are Mongolia, Russia and Siberia. No "advanced" civilizations are found to have started in those northern regions which truly are the "great white North".
No ancient "advanced" civilizations were found in Nordic Europe, Greenland, Iceland or Siberia. The earliest cultures of Nordic Europe were The Vikings and are the epitome of the Northern European culture of the period. Nobody in their right mind would claim these people as "advanced" culturally.
Where do all the "advanced" civilizations start? Towards the South: Egypt, Mesopotamia, Indus Valley. None of those places were originally occupied by or created by "Nordic" peoples. And neither Egypt nor Mesopotamia and the Indus valley were originally occupied by Northern European or Northern Asian populations. Hence, the argument that northern altitudes were responsible for such developments in cognitive ability are null and void because the greatest expression of such ability would be found in the extreme north by that logic. And as it stands there are no ancient civilizations in the extreme North. Hence, cognitive abilities of the Northern climates have nothing to do with early civilizations and their environments as all the early civilizations start in areas that are sub tropical and not in any way associated with extreme northern climes and the people were most certainly not northern European types.
Nobody in their right minds even to this day calls Iraqis "caucasoid" as in closely related to northern Europeans. Only clowns speak such nonsense.
Why is it that these folks try so hard to attach themselves to cultures and people thousands of miles away from their own homeland? If what they say is true then they should be falling all over ancient monuments of advanced culture and civilization in their own back yards of Northern and Western Europe. But they aren't. Therefore the stuff they are saying is simply bull sh*t.
Now given all of the above and the fact there are no ancient "advanced" civilizations in the extreme north of Europe or Asia, then why on earth did these people have to migrate to sub tropical environments to create their civilizations? Iraq and Egypt are some of the hottest places on earth surely they are not the ancient homeland of cold adapted peoples. So why would northern cold adapted people have to migrate to such hot, dry, sub tropical environments if their natural habitat in the cold expanses of the north were the basis of their cognition and ability to create "advanced" civilization?
Because obviously such cold environments have nothing to do with the creation of advanced civilization and the people who created early "advanced" civilization did not originate in Northern climates.
And as far as linking Northern Europeans and Northern Asians, again these clowns make no sense. Northern Asians have historically been much more creative and advanced in their material culture related to living in northern environments relative to their Northern European counterparts. Case in point,look at all the cultural artifacts and traditions from the populations to the North of Asia stretching into the Americas: exquisite furs, textiles, sleds, domestication of the horse; and on and on and on;igloos;canoes;kayaks;snow sleds;boots and so forth versus what in Northern Europe? Not so much. In fact the famous "Robin Hood" hat is an asian import from central Asia, attesting to the profound influence of Northern and Central asian culture on Medieval Europe.
posted
Nordic people were hunter gatherers until very recently.
And this is what ancient Russia's population looked like.
This reminds me of Dr. Clyde his thesis about the San Koi in Eurasia 30-40 Ky.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Dynastic race theory and the Hamitic Hypothesis have both fallen out of favor.. (See Ian Shaw, Oxford History Of Ancient Egypt)
The Egyptians therefore did not migrate from the North, and archaeological observations backs up more favored notions of mass migration from the south, due in part to a fertile Sahara and changing climatic conditions in the Nile and the Sahara.
The 1rst Dynasty remains at the tombs in Abydos were assessed. What was found is that out of all the samples they clustered closest to Kerma (Ethiopian sample) than anyone else.
The Egyptians had tropical body plans, meaning their skeletal type indicates adaptation to a tropical environment. Note: Egypt is not in the tropics, so take this info as you will, but I will say that the closest tropical habitat to Egypt is sub-Saharan Africa.
"The raw values in Table 6 suggest that Egyptians had the super-Negroid body plan described by Robins (1983). The values for the brachial and crural indices show that the distal segments of each limb are longer relative to the proximal segments than in many African populations." – Zakrzewski
Ancient Egyptian language belongs to the Afro-Asiatic language phylum, which began in Africa. Also the fact that Ancient Egyptian is older than semitic (semitic is the only Afro-Asiatic language spoken outside of Africa), that makes Ancient Egyptian an African language by default. And its closest neighbor is not Semitic, there is much debate on that but most say Beja or Chadic resembles it closest based on genetic relationships in linguistics.
Continuity has been found to last from the predynastic of Egypt, well into the dynastic.. Meaning they virtually stayed the same and didn't immediately become an all out "mixed" super heterogeneous population until later. Whatever they were (Ethiopic/Eastern African) in the predynastic, they were well into the dynastic, which is later confirmed through Old Kingdom Giza remains, etc...
The peoples of ancient Egypt, in the aforementioned tropical and semi-tropical/arid tropic zones, show clear limb proportion characteristics of tropically adapted people, and MORE closely resemble other tropically adapted Africans on the continent, than Europeans or Middle Easterners. (Raxter and Ruff 2008, Zakrewski 2003, 2007; Holliday et al, 2003, Kemp, 2005) 3) Undermining claims of cold-climate or skin color primacy for civilization, the great ancient Nile Valley civilization arose from the 'darker' more tropical south, NOT the cold climate or cool climate Mediterranean, Europe or Asia. (Clark, 1982; Shaw 1976, 2003; Bard, 2004; Vogel, 1997; Kemp 2005)
The ancient Egyptians in their tropical and sub-tropical/arid tropic environment, did not need cold climate people to develop their distinct culture. Several strands of culture from religion to material living put the Egyptians closer to nearby Africans than to cold-climate Mediterraneans, Europeans or Asiatics. (Keita, 1996, 2004; Yurco 1989, 1996; Williams, 1980; Britannia 1984; Wilkinson 1999; Wendorf, 2001) 5) European/Asiatic cold climate or light skin inspiration was unneeded by the tropically adapted Africans of ancient Egypt. They peopled the Nile Valley from the Sahara and the Sudan, and ancient Egypt is part of a tropical African lineage. Indigenous development sprang from a long tradition going back deep into the Sahara and the Sudan. (Lovell, 1999; Lefkowitz, 1993, 1996; Keita 1993, Irish 2006)
Not needing cold-climate/slight-skinned inspiration, the peoples of ancient Egypt are more closely linked with fellow tropical Africans in terms of cranial studies than with Europeans or Asiatics. Analysis of skeletal and cranial remains reveals that the ancient Egyptians of the early Dynastic and pre-Dynastic phases, link closer to nearby Saharan, Sudanic and East African populations than Mediterranean and Middle Eastern peoples. Greeks, Romans, Hyskos, Arabs and others were to appear later in Egyptian history. Craniometric studies generally place ancient Upper Egyptian populations closer to the range of tropical Africans in the Nile Valley and East Africa than to Mediterraneans, or Middle Easterners. (Keita 1990, 1993, 1996, 2004; Hiernaux 1975; Froment 2002; Kemp 2005)
Comparatively recent (in evolutionary terms) Europeans and Asiatics LOOKED LIKE tropical Africans with dark skin and other features, before cold-climate adaptation changed them. Light skin color is a RECENT development for Europeans and Asiatics. The foundations of civilization in terms of key animal and plant domesticates, and associated technology in Europe and Asia were thus laid by these dark-skinned migrants from Africa, who resembled today's Africans, undermining claims of the efficacy of white skin in laying the basic foundations or in building advanced civilizations such as that built by the tropically adapted peoples of the Nile Valley. (Jablonski 2000; Brace 2005; Hanihara 1996; Rethelford 2000) [/QB]
"Some have argued that various early Egyptians like the Badarians probably migrated northward from Nubia, while others see a wide-ranging movement of peoples across the breadth of the Sahara before the onset of desiccation. Whatever may be the origins of any particular people or civilization, however, it seems reasonably certain that the predynastic communities of the Nile valley were essentially indigenous in culture, drawing little inspiration from sources outside the continent during the several centuries directly preceding the onset of historical times..." (Robert July, Pre-Colonial Africa, 1975, p. 60-61)
German Institute for Archaeology -excavation of the tombs of the nobles in Thebes-West, Upper Egypt. In several of the noble specimens: "The basal epithelial cells were packed with melanin as expected for specimens of Negroid origin." (Determination of optimal rehydration, fixation and staining methods for histological and immunohistochemical analysis of mummified soft tissues", Biotechnic & Histochemistry 2005, 80(1): 7_/13)
"There is no archaeological, linguistic, or historical data which indicate a European or Asiatic invasion of, or migration to, the Nile Valley during First Dynasty times. Previous concepts about the origin of the First Dynasty Egyptians as being somehow external to the Nile Valley or less native are not supported by archaeology... In summary, the Abydos First Dynasty royal tomb contents reveal a notable craniometric heterogeneity. Southerners predominate. (Kieta, S. (1992) Further Studies of Crania From Ancient Northern Africa: An Analysis of Crania From First Dynasty Egyptian Tombs, Using Multiple Discriminant Functions. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 87:245-254)"
Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt and Ancient Egypt: Anatomy of a Civilization
"There is now a sufficient body of evidence from modern studies of skeletal remains to indicate that the ancient Egyptians, especially southern Egyptians, exhibited physical characteristics that are within the range of variation for ancient and modern indigenous peoples of the Sahara and tropical Africa.. In general, the inhabitants of Upper Egypt and Nubia had the greatest biological affinity to people of the Sahara and more southerly areas." (Nancy C. Lovell, " Egyptians, physical anthropology of," in Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt, ed. Kathryn A. Bard and Steven Blake Shubert, ( London and New York: Routledge, 1999) pp 328-332)
"Overall, when the Egyptian crania are evaluated in a Near Eastern (Lachish) versus African (Kerma, Kebel Moya, Ashanti) context) the affinity is with the Africans. The Sudan and Palestine are the most appropriate comparative regions which would have 'donated' people, along with the Sahara and Maghreb. Archaeology validates looking to these regions for population flow (see Hassan 1988)... Egyptian groups showed less overall affinity to Palestinian and Byzantine remains than to other African series, especially Sudanese." (Keita 1993)
"Populations and cultures now found south of the desert roamed far to the north. The culture of Upper Egypt, which became dynastic Egyptian civilization, could fairly be called a Sudanese transplant."(Egypt and Sub-Saharan Africa: Their Interaction. Encyclopedia of Precolonial Africa, by Joseph O. Vogel, AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek, California (1997), pp. 465-472 )
Peoples of the Sahara were an important part of the foundations of ancient Egypt and pioneered in several features that were to appear in Egypt, including religion, cattle cults, stone construction and astronomy etc. Some mainstream scientists consider the Saharans more organized on some counts than the early Egyptians. Also the Saharan culture shares clear links with other African peoples. Of note again is the southern direction of this cultural pioneering and growth, not the north, the Middle East, or the Mediterranean.
Posts: 2688 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol: Nordic people were hunter gatherers until very recently.
And this is what ancient Russia's population looked like.
This reminds me of Dr. Clyde his thesis about the San Koi in Eurasia 30-40 Ky.
Exactly. Typical Iron Age house from Britain. Yes, "advanced" civilization started here.
And they have the nerve to look down on anyone else who was living the exact same was as if they originated something better.
Britain:
quote: The roundhouse is a type of house with a circular plan, originally built in western Europe before the Roman occupation using walls made either of stone or of wooden posts joined by wattle-and-daub panels and a conical thatched roof.
quote: A Grubenhaus (pl. Grubenhäuser compounded from the German Grube [pit or cavity] and Haus [house]) is a type of sunken floored building built in many parts of northern Europe between the 5th and 12th centuries AD. In the United Kingdom, they are sometimes also known as 'grubhuts' or 'grubhouses'.
quote:Houses were arranged in parallel, and are of two predominant types. The most numerous are sunken huts, called Grubenhäuser in German. They are generally small in size, measuring 5-16 square metres in area. The other predominant type is surface dwellings called Wohnstallhäuser, which are of more variable size, tending to be larger. Some settlements have both types of dwellings, although Romanian finds have only sunken-floored houses. Although the variation in types may be attributable to the different ethnic groups in the zone, the differences are also a reflection of socio-economic factors. The Wohnstallhäuser are typical of Germanic settlements in central Europe, and had not been found in early cultures of south-eastern Europe. Conversely, the sunken-floored huts have been found in earlier Dacian cultures in the Carpathians and the farmers of the forest-steppe, and continued well after the period (and became widespread throughout eastern Europe). Whatever their origins, these styles were readily adopted by all peoples of the culture.
The point being that for most of human history, people did not live in "advanced" civilizations typified by central cities and advanced social organization. While "advanced" civilizations did exist, they were the exception not the norm. The most fundamental mode of human existence for the last 200,000 years has been nomadic hunting and gathering.
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: But sometimes we have to bitch slap them. . .Z-Enrique does a good job of that.
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: I don't know why you folks even respond to these clowns. Seriously.
No, you keep them around by replying to them. As long as they know you take them seriously and feel the need to reply, they will continue to post. They know they are liars and racists and simply want to provoke you with their obvious racist taunts. No more and no less. They could care less how often you reply with the same canned posts (Zaharan) they will still keep creating new threads with more and more moronic racist content. If you ignore them they will stop eventually once they see that their spamming is not getting any attention it doesn't deserve.
Posts: 8890 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Otzi the caveman 3300 B.C Italian alps Vs the Kings of Ta Seti 3300 B.C now what!!
Posts: 6546 | From: japan | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
Reserve head of a lady, from Giza, tomb G 4440. Made of limestone, and dating to the 4th dynasty
^^^before you post other pictures deal with these
Reserve Head of a man / prince of the Old Kingdom, as a matter of fact.
quote:However, a touch of red paint remaining on the ear of this head hints that the subject was male rather than female, because red is the traditional male skin color on sculptures. To further complicate matters, the tomb only contained space for a single burial, so exactly which head belonged there is not clear.
Posts: 535 | From: From the Darkest of the Abyss | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
Hey i found this at this egyptsearchreloaded.I wanted to do more research on it since euronuts keep bringing it up.
I wish i could have found this info before when i posted about J .
I really did not know,but i had a funny feeling this was the case anyway.
It make sense since it was around before the European/Asiatic cold climate types existed and before they came to the region J was from.
I did see something like these before but i just did not have the time to read everything and just forgot about this type of info.
Maybe some of you guys could share some more of thoughts and i hope some of you do mind me posting some of you past info,because it's really interesting and good.
quote- Zaharan, I agree with the mast majority of the information that you posted above, other then your piece on the difference between the Amhara and Oromo.
Firstly, rather then simply stating that the Amhara are mixed raced and the Oromo are not, is it not better to concentrate on the misinterperting of the general genetic make-up of the Ethiopian and Northeast African population. As in how in which many of the haplogroups falsely associated with "Eurasians" are indeed African. Without the bias, the scientific results would obviously fair out better.
The Beja and Amahara posses Haplogroup J1 at similar numbers, most of it being acquired during Neolithic times... only 2% being traceable to recent or historical movement. If J1 is indeed African, that solves the question... if it indeed originated in areas to the East of the the Red Sea, the populations in questions were physically African.
Simplistic "race percentage" models are dubious in Africa which has the highest genetic diversity in the world. That diversity proceeded from deeper sub-Saharan Africa, to East and N.E. Africa, then to the rest of the globe. All other populations, including Europeans and "Middle easterners" carry this diversity which was built into Africa to begin with. Africans thus don't need any "race mix" to look different. Their diversity is built-in and supplied the whole globe. Any returnees or "backflow" to Africa looked like Africans. (Brace 2005, Hanihara 1996, Holliday 2003).
Haplogroup J, characterized by the mutation 12f2.1,has been found at a frequency of approximately 18% in Ethiopians, with a relatively higher prevalence among the Amhara, where it has been found to exist at levels as high as 35% , of which about 33% is of the type J-M267, almost all of which was acquired during Neolithic times or earlier, while 2% is of the derived J-M172 type representing admixture due to recent and historic migrations.Semino O, Magri C, Benuzzi G, et al. (May 2004). "Origin, diffusion, and differentiation of Y-chromosome haplogroups E and J: inferences on the neolithization of Europe and later migratory events in the Mediterranean area". American Journal of Human Genetics 74 (5): 1023–34. doi:10.1086/386295. PMID 15069642
For example Haplogroup J* is largly among some Africans, i.e. Socotra, with the freguency reaching numbers as high as 70%. Like I said not only is J* likely of African origin, so is IJK.
Only 2% of the J haplogroups found among the Amhara can be linked to recent or historic admixture. The mass majority is Neolithic, and most of them don't match those in the Middle East therefore proposing an African origin for J in Africa. Yemen and Socotra possess the highest freguency and their basically in Africa.
quote- Haplogroup J must have originated somewhere along the Red Sea, since even the Beja who are Cushitic speakers possess J1-M267 at 43%, it makes sense. Haplogroup J* most likely moved north into Yemen and West into East Africa, moving along the Red Sea Coast, therefore explaining why Yemeni and Ethiopian J differ and do not match. The lack of J among Somalis and Afars can either be due to founders effect, genetic drift, or them being recent populations moving north from more southerly locations. Socotra's population is physically African in affiliation with other East African groups. Some Eurocentrics have even gone so far to call them Veddoid.
Or it may have originated in the vicinity of the Eastern Sudan/Eritrea/Socotra in which it would have had moved northeast into Yemen, where it experienced a significant genetic shift. In it's home origin, i.e. Africa, it's numbers would decrease due to negative shifts among the local population in which other haplogroups become to dominant. The origin of J* is obviously in African since almost 70% of the Socotra male population carries J*. J was most def. not introduced into Ethiopia via Yemen or Saudi Arabia, since their haplotypes differ and do not match.
J1 is basically restricted to populations surrounding Socotra and Yemen, and usually confines to African derived Semitic speaking populations.
And the fact that J1 is more frequent among Southern Egyptians then they are in Northern Egypt, points to an Eastern African origin for J1.
J1 is heavily concentrated on the southern most part of the Arabian peninsula.
Also, the majority of the J1 in Sudan and Egypt like Ethiopia and Eritrea, isn't recent or historic, but Neolithic or pretty mush old in regard to that haplogroup... since the origin can be roughly placed in that time period.
It makes sense that populations living in regions along the African Red Sea would have higher levels of J1 then people living further into Africa, the Levant, and in some cases parts of Southwest Asia.
Again I can't further emphasis the fact that the East African J1-M267 are not descended from those found in Yemen or Saudi Arabia, therefore no "racial" mixing. And both the Caucasus and North Africa have been eliminated in regard to the origin of J1-M267 due to it's general "physical" make-up. East Africa is the only logical answer, but there needs to be more research in regard to populations in and around Yemen and Saudi Arabia.
doctorisscientia wrote: The origin of J* is obviously in African since almost 70% of the Socotra male population carries J*.
In regard to the above. Both J* and J1, in particular J1-M267, are found in abundant numbers in the vincinity of East Africa, Hadhramaut, and Socotra. J2 is also found but in much decreased numbers.
Haplogroup J is found at it's highest freguency in that particular East African/Southern Yemeni region, reaching numbers as high as 80%.
Undifferentiated paragroup J* is only found on the East African island of Socotra.
"Haplogroup J* includes all of J except for J1 and J2. J* is rarely found outside of the island of Socotra, where it is quite frequent at 71.4%."
And both the Caucasus and North Africa have been eliminated in regard to the origin of J1-M267
Posts: 2688 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
“Black students received inferior educations”
“In the mid-1970s, Black students began to challenge the apartheid educational system, designed to integrate them into a racist and unequal economy. Denied access to jobs set aside for the white minority, Black students received inferior educations. In 1975, the government spent about 15 times more on the education of a white child than on the education of a Black child. As explained by Hendrik Verwoerd, an architect of the apartheid system, “Natives must be taught at an early age that equality with the Europeans is not for them.”
“Apartheid educational policies condemned black South Africans to a severely overcrowded school system with educational policies designed to limit achievement.”
Black youth in apartheid South Africa were deprived of their youthfulness. They were forced to bear the brunt of poverty, inferior education, lack of adequate recreation facilities and repression from the state.”
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic