^^^ I'm not saying the skin tones are not dark but most of these pictures are poorly lighted, dim
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
To Habaritess: while your claims may well be true for some tomb art, I'd have to say that the vast majority of tomb art is in relatively good quality for their age and still displays the Egyptians in the dark skin tones you speak of. Just pick up any book featuring ancient Egyptian tomb paintings or better yet, take a look on the net on google images or even in past threads of this forum featuring ancient Egyptian art and you can see that all the complexions are typically from mahogany to chocolate in color.
More to the topic..
Ramses III Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: To Habaritess: while your claims may well be true for some tomb art, I'd have to say that the vast majority of tomb art is in relatively good quality for their age and still displays the Egyptians in the dark skin tones you speak of. Just pick up any book featuring ancient Egyptian tomb paintings or better yet, take a look on the net on google images or even in past threads of this forum featuring ancient Egyptian art and you can see that all the complexions are typically from mahogany to chocolate in color.
More to the topic..
Ah, I see we are in agreement. My bad. Though I have always wondered why the topic of editing photos of Ancient Egyptian art work to depict an overall red skin tone for Egyptians is not talked about more on here. It is one of the reasons why Ancient Egyptians are seen as an overall "red" people or sun burnt arabs.
Examples:
Flipped scene
But carry on the topic.
Posts: 116 | From: Birmingham, AL | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Skeletal or mummified human remains, especially certain physiognomies, will usually confirm racial classification. Chohayeb (1991:69) attests that the Egyptian cephalic index91 or cranial relationship was dolichocephalic and that there was a tendency of bimaxillary protrusion in a number of the royal families. Radiographic studies of the facial structures of the royalty appeared to be homogeneous among the Old Kingdom rulers and rather heterogeneous in the New Kingdom period.
The Angle classification of the sagittal relationship between the maxilla and the mandible92 establishes a class I (neutrocclusion), class II (distocclusion), and class III (prognathism) relationships, as devised by the Katz’s modified method, in
--Brin et al.(2000:169).
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Trollkillah # Ish Gebor:
quote:Skeletal or mummified human remains, especially certain physiognomies, will usually confirm racial classification. Chohayeb (1991:69) attests that the Egyptian cephalic index91 or cranial relationship was dolichocephalic and that there was a tendency of bimaxillary protrusion in a number of the royal families. Radiographic studies of the facial structures of the royalty appeared to be homogeneous among the Old Kingdom rulers and rather heterogeneous in the New Kingdom period.
The Angle classification of the sagittal relationship between the maxilla and the mandible92 establishes a class I (neutrocclusion), class II (distocclusion), and class III (prognathism) relationships, as devised by the Katz’s modified method, in
--Brin et al.(2000:169).
What's the title of the paper?
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: you're endorsing the concept of race?
No, but I so realize the concept situ development.
How many times I have to repeat myself, before you will understand?
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Trollkillah # Ish Gebor:
quote:Skeletal or mummified human remains, especially certain physiognomies, will usually confirm racial classification. Chohayeb (1991:69) attests that the Egyptian cephalic index91 or cranial relationship was dolichocephalic and that there was a tendency of bimaxillary protrusion in a number of the royal families. Radiographic studies of the facial structures of the royalty appeared to be homogeneous among the Old Kingdom rulers and rather heterogeneous in the New Kingdom period.
The Angle classification of the sagittal relationship between the maxilla and the mandible92 establishes a class I (neutrocclusion), class II (distocclusion), and class III (prognathism) relationships, as devised by the Katz’s modified method, in
--Brin et al.(2000:169).
What's the title of the paper?
DENTISTS, DENTISTRY AND DENTAL DISEASES IN ANCIENT EGYPT
quote:Originally posted by Trollkillah # Ish Gebor:
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric:
quote:Originally posted by Trollkillah # Ish Gebor:
quote:Skeletal or mummified human remains, especially certain physiognomies, will usually confirm racial classification. Chohayeb (1991:69) attests that the Egyptian cephalic index91 or cranial relationship was dolichocephalic and that there was a tendency of bimaxillary protrusion in a number of the royal families. Radiographic studies of the facial structures of the royalty appeared to be homogeneous among the Old Kingdom rulers and rather heterogeneous in the New Kingdom period.
The Angle classification of the sagittal relationship between the maxilla and the mandible92 establishes a class I (neutrocclusion), class II (distocclusion), and class III (prognathism) relationships, as devised by the Katz’s modified method, in
--Brin et al.(2000:169).
What's the title of the paper?
DENTISTS, DENTISTRY AND DENTAL DISEASES IN ANCIENT EGYPT
Not surprising but interesting that they should mention dolichcephaly, prognathism, and they do confirm the greater heterogeneity in the New Kingdom. The author of the dissertation uses a lot of obsolete race classifications, and doesn't go beyond a 1972 ref in his section on ethnicity! Which is quite telling.. On that score the dissertation is full of dated references and for something that purports to be discussing current knowledge in the field, it fails to live up to the author's billing.. The author is a South African of Dutch descent and seems to have skipped over numerous key developments and scholarship in the field- last 2 decades..
COUNT 1) Brachchepaly is well within the range of African populations, and is nothing unusual. Africans are the most diverse phenotypically- Brachycephaly is nothing special and limb proportions and skull variation can co-exist in several configurations- nothing special.. In fact archaeological surveys have long discovered clear "Negroid" remains WITH brachycephalic elements. The two can go together, as can limb proportions and skull variation at the same time. QUOTE:
"I might refer to the occupant of grave 162 in Cemetery 22. The skull was a short, brachcephalic ovoid, there was definite prognathism, typical Negro hair and a slight beard confined to the chin." (_-The Archeological Survey of Nubia: Report For 1907-1908. By G. Elliot Smith, F. Wood Jones.)
"more thickset and short-headed (Bongos, Golos, Makarakas, with the kindred Zandehs of the Welle region). No explanation has been offered for their brachycephaly.." (--Man, past and present By Augustus Henry Keane. 1920.)
"At any rate during the later phases of the local Later Stone Age contrasting brachycephalic folk were also present in the region." -JD Fage. The Later Stone Age in Africa
In short, the phenotypic diversity of Africa puts "negroid" brachycephalic types well in place in the Nile Valley without needing any "incoming Caucasoids" to explain African diversity.
COUNT 2) Brachchepaly does not necessarily have a strong correlation with temperature. In fact skull shape is highly plastic and children of the same "race" without any admixture show skull changes as quickly as within one generation. Cultural practices also affect head shape, and cold climate Inuit fail to follow the alleged temperature rule. QUOTE:
"Crognier also suggested that the correlation between cold and head shape could be improved heat retention of brachchepalic (rounder) head shape found in colder climates; however this argument may not fully account for the phenomenon because cultural practices that protect the head (e.g. hats) are available in cold environments, In addition the Inuit of the Artic are as dolichocephalic (longer heads), as are Africans, suggesting that head shape is not related to environmental temperature. Finally other practices can influence head shape; for example, infant sleeping position can affect ultimate head shape. Also Boas showed the skull shape is highly plastic and can change in only on generation. Children of immigrants to the United States at the end of the nineteenth century were shown to have a different head shape that their parents. This many environmental factors can play a role in shaping head form, and temperature man be only one." --Noel Cameron. Human Growth and Development. (2002)
In short, temperature is unimpressive as an explanation of brachchepaly, and must take its place besides numerous other variables that bear on the issue.
"Not light-skinned enough to be a 'truly' Egyptian farmer.."
COUNT 3) Brachchepalization is also associated with increases in standard of living such as better diet due to agriculture. Thus a very plastic feature like Brachchepalization could easily change for Egyptians as they adopted better diets, including more agriculture. It should be noted that better diets can be obtained without full-blown agriculture through more intensive foraging and harvesting, and indeed the 'negroid' Badari and others enjoyed a rich reource base prior to farming and sustained relatively high population densities as they transitioned to more agriculture. Per scholars Jantz and Jantz 2000:
"In many parts of the world there has been a change toward shorter, broader crania in the past several thousand years. This change, referred to as brachycephalization, has been observed in Europe, Asia and America. A common explanation for this widespread trend is that it reflects functional responses to reduced masticatory stresses. The model has been formulated by Carlson and Van Gerven, (1977) based on their Nubian epipaleolithic-Neolithic series. The argument is that reduced masticatory stresses will result in crania that are shorter and higher in food producers than in hunters and gatherers. (See also Larsen 1997). Furthermore in Europe, where the data base is much richer, the period of most intensive brachycephalization occurs not with the Neolithic, but several thousand years later during the mediaeval period." --Jantz and Jantz 2000. The Meaning And Consequences Of Morphological Variation in “Exploring the Nature of Human Biological Diversity: Myth v. Reality” (AAA Prceedings 2004)
------------ Mo betta Munchies in the Nile Valley------- QUOTE: "With the onset of the Neolithic, the dietary diversity of hunter-gatherers is replaced with dietary specialization on one or a few cereal crops and the products of domestic animals... Increasing sedentism and population density are almost universally associated with increases in infectious disease.. and may underpin the the reduction in stature in the Predynastic period. Archaeological evidence suggests that the Badarian civilization had higher population density than did any other contemporaneous civilizations (Gabriel, 1987, Hassan 1988)." --Pinhasi and Stock 2011. Human Bioarchaelogy of the Transition to Agriculture -----------------------------------
In short, there were plenty of ways for (a) better diets to cause brachchepalization in the Nile Valley, and (b) if migrants are a factor, said migrants need not have cone from cold climates at all. They only need to be people with better, more intensive food sourcing and this can be richly obtained in the Nile Valley in various eras, with or without full-blown agriculture.
All kinds of weather over millennia in the Sahara, cool, non-cool.. whatever.. plenty of time and scope to develop diversity and variability in-situ
COUNT 4) Finally, even if temperature is the cause, brachchepalization as the experts show is highly plastic. The cooler temperatures of the Saharan zone over time and Egypt as the climate waxed back and forth for millennia, allowed plenty of scope for the tropical Africans therein, to adapt in-situ, without needing any cold climate "associates." [The conservative, slower- changing limb proportions however are evidence of the origin and makeup of these tropical Africans.
And even if there was migration from cooler climates, the cooler climes are already built into the broad area in question- within the millennia long span of Saharan climate fluctuations, plus within the cooler climes of other Egyptian areas, there was both plenty of time and scope for people with varying degrees of dolichchepaly or brachchepaly to appear, without needing any "outside help."
COUNT 5) As a social construct, the construct "blacks" include people with brown skin, (indeed tropical Africans have the higest skin color diversity) and the conservative limb proportions of the Egyptians, which cluster with African-Americans in several studies, speak to the clear' tropical provenance of the ancient peoples. Social construct, or anthropological data- makes no difference- same result.
That's five strikes against the Brachchepaly argument and other associated claims.
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
A number of studies show bimaxillary protrusions in substantial frequency among African type populations like Af Americans. ------------------------------------------------------------
Farrow, et al. 1993. Bimaxillary protrusion in black Americans-an esthetic evaluation and the treatment considerations. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. Volume 104, Issue 3, Pages 240-250, September 1993
Abstract This study attempted to discover what black Americans find attractive about their profile. Fifteen black patients (eight males, seven females) were selected at random and used as models. Lateral photographs were taken on each patient, and a computer was used to alter the profiles to depict different levels of bimaxillary protrusion. Each patient was manipulated into four different profile types according to specific numerical guidelines. A vertical reference line from soft tissue glabella, perpendicular to Frankfort horizontal, was used to measure the lip position. In each profile type only the horizontal lip position was altered. The four profile types were classified as S (straight) BM1, (bimax one), BM2 (bimax two) and BM3 (bimax three). The S profile was considered a straight or white facial profile, and the BM3 was an extreme example of bimaxillary protrusion. The photographs were surveyed among black and white laypersons, general dentists, and orthodontists. The results found the BM1, profile to be the most attractive. This was consistent with all groups surveyed. The BM1 profile would be considered a slightly convex profile and is more protrusive than white orthodontic norms. In this study comparisons of this profile to other standards are made and treatment considerations for black patients are discussed.
-------------------- 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 |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: A number of studies show bimaxillary protrusions in substantial frequency among African type populations like Af Americans. ------------------------------------------------------------
Farrow, et al. 1993. Bimaxillary protrusion in black Americans-an esthetic evaluation and the treatment considerations. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. Volume 104, Issue 3, Pages 240-250, September 1993
Abstract This study attempted to discover what black Americans find attractive about their profile. Fifteen black patients (eight males, seven females) were selected at random and used as models. Lateral photographs were taken on each patient, and a computer was used to alter the profiles to depict different levels of bimaxillary protrusion. Each patient was manipulated into four different profile types according to specific numerical guidelines. A vertical reference line from soft tissue glabella, perpendicular to Frankfort horizontal, was used to measure the lip position. In each profile type only the horizontal lip position was altered. The four profile types were classified as S (straight) BM1, (bimax one), BM2 (bimax two) and BM3 (bimax three). The S profile was considered a straight or white facial profile, and the BM3 was an extreme example of bimaxillary protrusion. The photographs were surveyed among black and white laypersons, general dentists, and orthodontists. The results found the BM1, profile to be the most attractive. This was consistent with all groups surveyed. The BM1 profile would be considered a slightly convex profile and is more protrusive than white orthodontic norms. In this study comparisons of this profile to other standards are made and treatment considerations for black patients are discussed.
Interesting,
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wonder of Raamses II would turn out to be E1b1a as well since because of the appearance of his mummy, his hair, he was claimed to have been a red haired "leucoderm" of Libyan extraction.
Does anyone know if any genetic testing has been done on his remains?
Posts: 682 | From: East Coast | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by melchior7: I wonder of Raamses II would turn out to be E1b1a as well since because of the appearance of his mummy, his hair, he was claimed to have been a red haired "leucoderm" of Libyan extraction.
Does anyone know if any genetic testing has been done on his remains?
You are delusional, with preassumptions.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ The whole 'red-head' Ramses issue is a dead horse that has been beaten into a smear on the ground in this forum.
The reddish tint of his hair is due to phaelomelanin, Even though phaelomelanin is what makes hair red, it is not uncommon to find this pigment in brunettes or dark hair along with eumelanin that gives a jet black pigment. Thus the hair is essentially black with a brownish tinge.
According to studies that have been cited many times, when hair is oxidized by mummification either artificially through chemicals or naturally through desiccation, eumelanin breaks down quickly while phaelomelanin tends to last longer. This is why many mummies including those from the Badarian period tend to be found with reddish looking hair. When the bodies were alive the hair would have been much darker because of the eumelanin.
As for Ramses' features, it is a fact that craniofacially, he does possess many traits in common with Levantines, specifically early ones from the Natufian period, as well as some coastal North Africans.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: Moving to the opposite geographical extremity, the very small sample populations available from northern Egypt from before the 1st Dynasty (Merimda, Maadi and Wadi Digla) turn out to be significantly different from sample populations from early Palestine and Byblos, suggesting a lack of common ancestors over a long time. If there was a south-north cline of variation along the Nile valley it did not, from this limited evidence, continue smoothly on into southern Palestine. The limb-length proportions of males from the Egyptian sites group them with Africans rather than with Europeans.
- From Ancient Egypt: Anatomy of a Civilisation (Kemp, 2005, p.54)
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Trollkillah # Ish Gebor:
quote:Originally posted by melchior7: I wonder of Raamses II would turn out to be E1b1a as well since because of the appearance of his mummy, his hair, he was claimed to have been a red haired "leucoderm" of Libyan extraction.
Does anyone know if any genetic testing has been done on his remains?
quote: Moving to the opposite geographical extremity, the very small sample populations available from northern Egypt from before the 1st Dynasty (Merimda, Maadi and Wadi Digla) turn out to be significantly different from sample populations from early Palestine and Byblos, suggesting a lack of common ancestors over a long time. If there was a south-north cline of variation along the Nile valley it did not, from this limited evidence, continue smoothly on into southern Palestine. The limb-length proportions of males from the Egyptian sites group them with Africans rather than with Europeans.
- From Ancient Egypt: Anatomy of a Civilisation (Kemp, 2005, p.54)
Yes, I am well aware of this quote from Kemp which I myself have cited many times! If this is suppose to be some sort of rebuttal to my last post then you are obviously mistaken since, my post never referred to limb-length or any bodily features but rather cranio-facial features specifically with Natufians of mesolithic Palestine. You know, the Natufians who were initially described as "negroid" and is recently confirmed as a having 'Sub-Saharan' component.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
What do you think about the TribeScores, lioness? How do they fit? Are the trolls wrong for ignoring the fact that they blatantly contradict their fairy tale narrative that Egyptians originate from the regions with the highest MLI scores?
Ramses III Horn of Africa (0.93) African Great Lakes (0.84) Tropical West Africa, Levantine (0.76) North Africa (0.75) Southern Africa (0.74)
Unknown man E Horn of Africa (0.86) African Great Lakes (0.71) Southern African (0.66) North African (0.62) Tropical West African (0.54)
The gap between East and non-East African (West African, South African, North African) samples to these royal individuals in terms of TribeScores is more or less 20-30 percentiles. Wow. Talk about a complete annihilation of these trolls' fairytales.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: What do you think about the TribeScores, lioness? How do they fit? Are the trolls wrong for ignoring the fact that they blatantly contradict their fairy tale narrative that Egyptians originate from the regions with the highest MLI scores?
Ramses III Horn of Africa (0.93) African Great Lakes (0.84) Tropical West Africa, Levantine (0.76) North Africa (0.75) Southern Africa (0.74)
Unknown man E Horn of Africa (0.86) African Great Lakes (0.71) Southern African (0.66) North African (0.62) Tropical West African (0.54)
The gap between East and non-East African (West African, South African, North African) samples to these royal individuals in terms of TribeScores is more or less 20-30 percentiles. Wow. Talk about a complete annihilation of these trolls' fairytales.
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: Still in denial about the DNA Tribes results?
How am I in denial when I'm citing directly from the DNA Tribes report? Since it's YOU who consistently refuses to address the TribeScores, it is YOU who is in denial. Thanks for posting the link so that the readers can confirm the extent to which you're habitually full of sh!t!
Why does Ramses III's STR profile fit better in the genetic Horner region than 93% of the individual Horner samples in DNA Tribes' database, whereas the corresponding values of Ramses III's ranking in African genetic regions outside of East Africa are 76% (Tropical West Africa & Levant/Egypt), 75% (North Africa) and 74% (Southern Africa)?
Anyone?
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Ramses III Horn of Africa (0.93) African Great Lakes (0.84) Tropical West Africa, Levantine (0.76) North Africa (0.75) Southern Africa (0.74)
posted
With that image you're merely demonstrating that Ramses III's STR profile has a likelihood of occurring in a descending order with the likelihood being higher in certain African regions than other African regions. What of it, you dumb low IQ troll? What exactly is your point? Are you saying that the MLI scores are admixture percentages and that the descending order of likelihoods are proportionately indicative of the ancestral contributions to Ramses III's genepool? How do MLI scores refute what I'm saying? Lay it out, right now please.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
That may help settle the argument .
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Can someone explain " Tribe score" vs MLI?
That may help settle the argument .
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
The Tribescores just give the proportion of individuals who have a lower or higher value of MLI for their own region they live in than the subject in question(DNA Tribes client, mummy). For example, a recent Arabian now living as a Somali, has a low MLI scores for Horn Africa (his STR alleles don't match that region very much but the Arabian region instead, where is parents or great..great grandparents came from). The MLI being the proportion of alleles frequency in that region compared to the rest of the world. The Tribescore is a percentile. So of course a real African like Ramses III will have a higher value that somebody closer to the Arabian region but now living in Somalia (as well as with other people who are heavily admixed with other regions than Horn Africa but still living in Horn Africa).
As demonstrated above , Horn Africans individuals composing the Horn Africa populations from their sampled data are 70% from other genetic regions (they are "recent" non-Horn African), so we can easily imagine they have a low MLI scores for their own region they now live in, so it's no biggy if the mummy profile match more than 93% of the invididuals in the Horn African region considering that the region is so admixed already with post-dynastic immigration. With individuals who have a low MLI value for their own region.
TribeScores are a unique scoring method developed by DNA Tribes that compares a person's match scores for a population to the scores of actual members within that ethnic group or region. Each DNA Tribes match includes a TribeScore in parentheses, listing your MLI score’s percentile in that population. TribeScores compares your MLI scores to members of each ethnic group and world region. For instance, results listing “Switzerland (0.73)” indicate that your MLI score is higher than 73% of scores from this Swiss reference population, and lower than 27% of these Swiss individuals. TribeScores of (0.05) and above are within the expected range for a population, and TribeScores between the (0.25) and above are ordinary or typical for members of that population. TribeScores indicate how high or low your score is in the specific context of each population, providing the necessary point of reference to explain each MLI score.
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote: Originally posted by the lioness,: TribeScores indicate how high or low your score is in the specific context of each population, providing the necessary point of reference to explain each MLI score.
Nuff said. In and of themselves, MLI scores are devoid of the very context that is needed to make sense of them.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Read this several times but every time I think I got it… I doubt myself. But I will take a shot.
Swenet may be right. It looks like MLI score is based upon the average of the ENTIRE population while; Tribes Score is a direct comparison to each indidual of the subject population. In other words they tested Rameses III profile against person-by-person(to each individual within a "tribe", using their unique algorithm
Remember averages(MLI) may be skewed because some members in the Great Lakes may be very close to Rameses III while some are very distant. It is the old median vs mode vs average thing in high school Statistics. So Rameses III will better fit into the Ethiopian Tribes than Great Lakes Tribes because MORE people like him exist IN Ethiopia than the Great Lakes.
I am open to correction or re-interpretation.
Swenet you are on a role bro. Two in two days! May be I had you pegged wrong. Nice discussion AMRTU.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Irregardless E1b1a exist in Ethiopia. They are all Africans.
Lioness…my high IQ at work again. He! He!
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Yo! I told you already. I like using the word, irregardless, although it irks some people. Sage may be another one.
He has a thing for sentence structure and choice of words.
I am about getting the most effective means of getting the message across.
ie it is deliberate
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
I just want to warn people reading this forum about: Swenet Beyoku Trollkillah # Ish Gebor (aka Troll Patrol) Djehuti Tukuler (aka alTakruri) xyyman A few others.
Those people are undercover racists trying to promote the hamitic race myth. What great Africans like Diop, Obenga fought against since the 50s and rejected as pseudo scientific racism by every quarters. Trying to say Ancient Egyptians were closer to Eurasians than most Sub-Saharan Africans (Yoruba, Somali, Wolof, Kongo, Zulu, Ganda, Dinka, etc) despite the genetic and archaeological results exposed in this thread and on this forum showing us the contrary. Notice how they squirm at the mention of haplogroup E-P2 obliterating their stupid racist theory!! The common paternal haplogroup among East, West and most African people alongside haplogroup A and B.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Funny how you keep repeating the above libel yet you are NEVER able to prove it! Please cite posts from myself or anyone else in this forum that supports the long debunked 'Hamitic hypothesis'. As Tukuler has pointed out, if anyone does this it is YOU YOURSELF!!
I suggest you seek professional psychological help. Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Ramses III Horn of Africa (0.93) African Great Lakes (0.84) Tropical West Africa, Levantine (0.76) North Africa (0.75) Southern Africa (0.74)
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Funny how you keep repeating the above libel yet you are NEVER able to prove it!
I don't need to prove it. I just want people to be aware of the issue, and make their own assessment by taking into account your posts and general behavior on this forum.
I just want to add it's very lame of you trying to steal African historical heritage like that. I don't see the purpose because at the end scientific evidences wins (like the Ramses III, screaming mummy and 18th Royal dynasty aDNA analysis or the cultural continuity between past African culture and Ancient Egypt). I don't see the purpose in any form of racism. This goes to you and other ID named above.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
The statement reminds me of Cass when I brought up Sergi's Medit Race. He went to battle with me on "what is" Sergi's Medit Race. Even Dana was cuaght up in it and misguided, Cass told me I was wrong about Sergi.
After he/Cass read the book he then switched his views now calling Sergi book crap. Dana never admitted she was wrong.
Kneee-jerk reaction is is always easy to disassembly.
So , I ask, again, what is the Hamitic myth. AMRTU. I don't see how it fits in with your views of Ethiopans being pure Africans.
--
Calling me a racist is really absurd and laughable. You need a chill pill my man. They don't come blacker than me(figuratively).
I am the First man ...and proud of it.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Xyyman: Swenet may be right. It looks like MLI score is based upon the average of the ENTIRE population while; Tribes Score is a direct comparison to each indidual of the subject population. In other words they tested Rameses III profile against person- by-person(to each individual within a "tribe", using their unique algorithm
Don't take my word for it; go through DNA Tribes' documents, specifically their sample results and see how TribeScores work vis a vis MLI scores. For instance, African Americans have the highest TribeScores with fellow African American samples, but their MLI scores may peak in an African continental sample (Angola) over most of the African American samples. If we take MLI scores literal here we come to the false conclusion that African Americans are more related to the Angolan mainland Africans than most of the African American samples.
Also, heterogeneity hampers the ability of a mixed population to display high peaks. For instance, the North African region seems--at least in documents dating back to 2007--to be incapable of displaying much higher MLI scores than 200 a black Canadian whose STR profile ranked in the 99th percentile of the North African region only had an MLI score of 107) with that region. Notice also in that same pic, the black Canadian ranks in the 99th percentile of the Arabian region, but this corresponds to an MLI score which is staggeringly low (226). Therefore, a literal interpretation of MLI scores is like comparing apples with oranges as homogeneous African populations will have more potential to display high MLI scores.
With an 8 STR profile, the 93th percentile ranking of Ramses III in the Horn genetic region region corresponds to a low MLI score of 114, whereas a much lower ranking (74th percentile) of Ramses III in the southern Africa region corresponds to an MLI score which is much higher than the MLI score of the Horn region, even though Ramses III's ranking in the Horn region has almost reached it's peak at 93%. Ramses III's MLI score with the Horn region therefore cannot be directly compared with the other African regions.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: They were genetically similar to modern day Sub-Saharan Africans.
As if I said otherwise, lying piece of sh!t. It pains you to no end that Ramses IIIs STR profile ranks no different, percentile wise, in the combined Egypt/Levant region than in the African regions outside of DNA Tribes' African regions along the Indian Ocean Coast.
Burns, doesn't it?
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Ramses III Horn of Africa (0.93) African Great Lakes (0.84)
(-------gap--------)
Tropical West Africa, Levantine (0.76) North Africa (0.75) Southern Africa (0.74)
posted
I already discussed the percentile scores before here. Are you in denial about that too?
DNA Tribes: Specifically, both of these ancient individuals inherited the alleles D21S11=35 and CSFIPO=7, which are found throughout Sub-Saharan Africa but are comparatively rare or absent in other regions of the world . These African related alleles are different from the African related alleles identified for the previously studied Amarna period mummies (D18S51=19 and D21S11=34).11 This provides independent evidence for African autosomal ancestry in two different pharaonic families of New Kingdom Egypt.
posted
Ramses III's and Pentawer's STR profile ranking in DNA Tribes' African genetic regions. It pains Afroloons who are in it to claim region-specific African civilizations as trophies, not because it's African history, but because they're obsessed with using these civis as linchpins for their therapeutic pseudo-historical fairytales.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Ramses III-----------------------------------Pentawer Horn of Africa (0.93)--------------------------Horn of Africa (0.86) African Great Lakes (0.84)--------------------African Great Lakes (0.71) Tropical West Africa, Levant (0.76)------------Southern African (0.66) North Africa (0.75)----------------------------North African (0.62) Southern Africa (0.74)------------------------Tropical West African (0.54) ------------------------------------------------Levant (0.5)
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: It pains Afroloons who are in it to claim region-specific African civilizations as trophies and linchpins for their therapeutic pseudo-historical fairytales.
Racist crap again.
Ancient Egypt can be considered part of the African history the same way Ancient Greece can be considered part of the European history.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
Where did I say otherwise in your quote, lying piece of sh!t?
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Where did I say otherwise in your quote, lying piece of sh!t?
So what's the crap you said about region-specific?
DNA Tribes says African Great Lakes, Southern and West Africans then Horn of Africa in that order and you try to spin it to mean Horn Africans first for some reason.
posted
Fact: you pathetically try to project your region- specific ancestry into the proto Ancient Egyptian population, no matter how much you have to lie and manipulate the data. Hence, your effort since day 1 to deny the fact that there is African substructure. The very existence of African substructure upsets your fairytale that Egyptians were your ancestors or that they come from your ancestral population some time in the holocene. It upsets your fairytale and therefore you've set out to deny and stigmatize the idea. Everyone who argues for the existence of substructure is a racist, huh?
Deal with it, lying ass pig
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Ramses III's and Pentawer's STR profile ranking in DNA Tribes' African genetic regions.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Ramses III-----------------------------------Pentawer Horn of Africa (0.93)--------------------------Horn of Africa (0.86) African Great Lakes (0.84)--------------------African Great Lakes (0.71) Tropical West Africa, Levant (0.76)------------Southern African (0.66) North Africa (0.75)----------------------------North African (0.62) Southern Africa (0.74)------------------------Tropical West African (0.54) ------------------------------------------------Levant (0.5)
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: So what's the crap you said about region-specific?
This is the region-specific "crap" I was talking about:
quote: According to our ADMIXTURE results, two distinct sub-Saharan ancestries are present in Egyptian individuals at k = 6:10; these two ancestry components are highest in the Kenyan Luhya and Maasai populations. However, the “Luhya” ancestry is present at very low proportions, below 10% at k = 6 and below 5% at k = 8 and there is also “Luhya” ancestry detectable in Maasai populations. Thus, we chose the Maasai as the best ancestral sub-Saharan population for extant Egyptians.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic