We don't need a genetics chart to understand what racists mean when they say white. They mean skin color. That is the only thing that is relevant to this discussion.
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: We don't need a genetics chart to understand what racists mean when they say white. They mean skin color. That is the only thing that is relevant to this discussion.
This dude just doesn't get it. He's simply too slow to see the light, which is that aspects of the standard ES narrative were wrong and that select aspects of the old literature were right.
He's deluded to the point that he thinks genetics is irrelevant to settling the points of contention where there was friction between both schools of thought and thinks it's all a matter of skin color. Talk about mental constipation.
When Upper Palaeolithic aDNA from the ancestors of modern North Africans comes out, and it'll be parsed from possible outside influences, Doug and other clowns like Tropicals Redacted are going to be laughing stock and academics are going to eventually classify these buffoons in the same boat as creationists who think humans are 6000 years old.
Mark my words.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
What's even more pathetic is that clowns like Tropicals Redacted have the audacity to pretend in public that Keita agrees with their position.
He doesn't (note that there is a convergence between Keita's views and the racist literature in terms of where Africans might cluster in cranio-facial analysis): https://youtu.be/qErhFiCvyKE?t=1m14s
Note that the man in the audience whom Keita is addressing talks just like Tropicals Redacted, Amun Ra and certain others here. From my experience, these people will simply NEVER get it. It's the same reason why you have 25 pages of this thread and so-called 'Egyptsearch veterans' arguing against what I'm saying with weak arguments. I bet that guy in that lecture is still going around repeating the same crap Keita told him to stay away from. Just like Tropicals Redacted, who has been repeatedly proven to be wrong, but still repeats his delusions.
When you confront these clowns they'll act like Keita is playing a game to 'please' European academics... that his caveats are 'optional' things that you can somehow take or leave. That's why I'm waiting for Tropicals Redacted to publish his "book" or "literature review" (lol!) and prove to the academics he's persecuting that he's more of a clown than them.
Also peep the mental blockage and how dense some of these people are. It's definitely a mental constipation thing that isn't going to go away any time soon, no matter how many times you try to explain it:
quote:Nguzo LoveInLoFi 1 year ago Why can't he [Keita] unequivocally say that they are African though?
quote:Nguzo LoveInLoFi 1 year ago At 7:33 he [Keita] uses DNA lineage, geography and language to discount the people of PauPau New Guinea from being African- yet he is reluctant to call the Ancient people of Khmt( Egypt) African though their DNA lineage, geography and language links them with other African people?
Keita, in fact, does say African and related phrases. He just doesn't use the problematic racial terminology these people want to hear so desperately. Nguzo is making stuff up now to disparage Keita. Same tactics we're familiar with when it comes to some of the other salty clowns (just read this thread to see the strawman attacks play out again and again).
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Deleted
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well it looks like I am going to finally drop the bomb and end the stupid issue in this thread; for all you eurocentric ass-wipes who are trying to create a false issue out of the term "black" with red herring arguments, please explain this then.
How come nearly ALL European colonial writers during the 1800's and 1900's, EXTENSIVELY USED BLACK TO DESCRIBE BLACK PEOPLE/AFRICAN PEOPLE IN HISTORY? AND ALSO NON-AFRICAN ASIATIC "BLACK PEOPLES" IN ASIA?
Making inquiries from one of the principal native revenue officials at the place, it was ascertained that there was a family living hardly a mile away, of which more than one of the members has been born, and continued, white all their lives. That this did not result from their being lepers, and none of their neighbors were in the least afraid of them, though opinion was not clear as to the whiteness not being a disease.
Losing no time, it did not take long to reach the hint in which this family of albinos were to be found. They are of the Hindu blacksmith caste. The father and mother are stated to be of the ordinary BLACKNESS OF NATIVES OF INDIA, but were not seen on this occasion.
A SON, AGED TWENTY-TWO, WAS THERE WORKING AT HIS TRADE, WITH THE WHITE COLOR, FEATURES, AND LIGHT FLAXEN HAIR OF A EUROPEAN, THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BEING A COARSENESS OF THE TEXTURE OF THE SKIN, AND A SLIGHTLY VACANT EXPRESSION. There was beside him, an apparently elder brother, quite dark, and a native Hindu in every respect. It was said that albinos has occasionally appeared in the family, one of the uncles for instance, HAVING BEEN WHITE.
On being questioned AS TO WHETHER THERE WAS ANY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE ALBINOS AND ORDINARY NATIVES, IT WAS ONCE SAID THAT THE FORMER COULD NOT STAND BEING IN THE SUN, WHICH REDDENED AND INFLAMED THE SKIN, UPON WHICH THE REMARK FELL FROM THE WRITER THAT IT COULD BE WORTH WHILE TO TRANSPORT SUCH INDIVIDUALS TO A COLD CLIMATE, WHERE THEY WOULD BE EXPOSED TO NO INCONVENIENCE.
AND SO IT WOULD, BECAUSE THERE CAN BE NO DOUBT THAT ONE OF THESE WHITE HINDUS, EARLY TAKEN, AND EDUCATED IN A EUROPEAN CLIMATE, WOULD FROM PALPABLE OBSERVATION OF THE SPECIMEN NOW DESCRIBED BE ABSOLUTELY INDISTINGUISHABLE AS A NATIVE OF INDIA.
Evidently some cause has interfered with the production of pigment in the cells, with the effect of rendering the albinos highly sensitive, and more so then a European, to the invisible heat rays of the spectrum, which are so injurious to the constitution in India.
THE CONTRAST BETWEEN THE FACES OF THE BROTHERS WERE PECULIARLY STRIKING, FOR THERE WAS SUFFICIENT RESEMBLANCE, IN THE LOWER PART OF THE FACE ESPECIALLY, TO SHOW THERE WAS A DISTINCT RELATIONSHIP- THAT OF THE ONE WHO WAS DARK WORE THE ORDINARY MILD COMPOSURE; BUT THE OTHER, BY THE MERE CHANGE OF COLOR, HAD COMPLETELY AND INADVERTENTLY THROWN OFF THE ORIENTAL MASK; AND IT WOULD BE ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO CONVEY TO ANYONE, NOT SEEING IT EXEMPLIFIED, HOW VAST A CHANGE COULD BE MADE BY SO SIMPLE AN ALTERATION, DISPLAYING THE WAY THE REAL INDIVIDUALITY OF RACE IS LURKING IN AN EXTRAORDINARY MANNER BENEATH A TROPICAL BLACKNESS.
254 J. Cjelawfubd " Colour as a Test o/ihe Races of Man.
" The offspring of an Albino with a perfect individual of the same race, would not be a half-caste, but either an Albino or an ordinary individual The child of an Albino Negro, with a common Negro, for example, is always either a Negro or an Albino, while the child of an Albino Negress by an European, would assuredly be either an ordinary Mulatto or an Albino Mulatto.
There is no recorded example of the union to the production of offspring of two Albinos, but it is certain that if such were to take place, the offspring would not be a true hybrid, but a creature with or without the colouring matter. The union of two Albinos is, of course, avoided by Albinos sensible of their own imperfection, and consequently desirous that their offspring should return to the normal and approved type of the stamp to which they belong.
" At other times, the transformation " [of colour] '* may be sadden, arising from cir-ie call accidental For example, there may be an Albino boy in a family, in which there had been no Albino before. Let this boy grow up to man's estate and marry, and it is probable that one or more of his children may be Albinos like himself But let him marry an Albino woman, and all the issue of such a marriage may be Albinos like the parents. SUPPOSE TWO SUCH FAMILIES TO BE PLACED ON AN ISLAND BY THEMSELVES, AND THEN TO INTERMARRY, AND THERE WOULD PROBABLY THEN BE A DISTINCT RACE OF ALBINOS AS CUMSTANCES WHCH W CANNOT EXPLAIN, AND WHICH WE, THEREFORE, THERE NOW IS OF NEGROES."
WHO WAS TO PERFORM THE CURIOUS EXPERIMENT OF PLACING ALBINO FAMILIES IN A DESERT ISLAND? THE TRANSFORMATION OF COMPLEXIONS, IF IT EVER HAPPENED AT ALL, MUST HAVE TAKEN PLACE AT A TIME WHEN ALL MANKIND WERE STILL SAVAGES, SINCE WE HAVE NO RECORD OF IT; AND RECORDS, AS IS WELL KNOWN, ARE ONLY KEPT IN A VERY ADVANCED STATE OF SOCIETY.
IN A SAVAGE STATE OF SOCIETY, THE ALBINO, AN IMPERFECT BEING, NOT ABLE EFLTECTUALLY TO HELP HIMSELF OR TO HELP OTHERS, IS FAR MORE LIKELY TO BE DESTROYED, AS ARE OTHER IMPERFECT BIRTHS, THAN TO BE MULTIPLIED, BY THE PERFORMANCE OF AN EXPERIMENT WHICH, EVEN THE CURIOSITY OF CIVILISED MAN HAS NEVER ATTEMPTED.
IF THE EXPERIMENT WERE EVER MADE, THE PROBABILITY IS THAT A GENUINE NEGRO WOULD NOW AND THEN SPRING UP, AND HENCE, THAT INSTEAD OF A WHITE POPULATION, WE SHOULD HAVE A PIE-BALD ONE, " ^THE WHITES BEING ONLY COLOURLESS NEGROES AND THE BLACKS COLOURED ONES. As already stated, the intermarriage of Albinos or of any other congenital malformations, is far more likely to be avoided than encouraged.
WHEN I WAS IN THE COUNTRY OF THE BURMESE, AN ALBINO WAS POINTED OUT TO ME I HAD LONG TAKEN HIM FOR AN UGLY DANE OR NORWEGIAN, FOR HE WAS DRESSED AS AN EUROPEAN. ON INQUIRY, I FOUND THAT HE WAS A BURMESE IN ALL BUT THE ABSENCE OF COLOUR.
AS AN UNNATURAL BIRTH HE HAD BEEN DISCARDED BY HIS PARENTS, WHO HANDED HIM OVER TO A CATHOLIC PRIEST, WHO BROUGHT HIM UP AS A CHRISTIAN " CLAD HIM IN AN EUROPEAN COSTUME, AND APPRENTICED HIM TO AN ENGLISH SHIP-CARPENTER. COLONEL YULE, SPEAKING OF THE HAIR-COVERED BURMESE WOMAN BEFORE MENTIONED,FIE KING OFFERED A REWARD TO ANY ONE WHO WOULD MARRY HER, BUT IT WAS LONG BEFORE ANY ONE WAS FOUND BOLD ENOUGH, OR AVARICIOUS ENOUGH TO VENTURE.''
When I saw this person as a child, she was about two years old, and when Colonel Yule saw her, her eldest child was of the age of four years only, so that the probability is, that she did not obtain a husband until six-and- twenty, a very late age in a country in which marriage usually takes place at the age of puberty. I conclude, then, that a race of Albinos is no more likely to spring up than a race of men with hare-lips, or a race says,"
Ceylon A General_Description of the Island Historical Physical
"Albinism, which exhibits itself among all the fauna of Ceylon, is not confined to the animals, but occasionally breaks out among the natives: instances have occurred where they were spotted black and white, and with buff hair.
Although the Sinhalese evince a singular preference for elephants when marked in this manner, they consider it a great misfortune when it occurs amongst their children, and it has been supposed many are '* made away with " on this account.
COLONEL LOW, IN AN ARTICLE IN THE '' TRANSACTIONS OF THE BOYAL ASIATIC SOCIETY," GIVES AN ACCOUNT OF A MALAY ALBINO, A VERY STOUT MAN, RESEMBLING A FLORID EUROPEAN, WITH RED HAIR, BUT HIS CHILDREN WERE QUITE BLACK."
quote: AN ABORIGINAL ALBINO. A SEARCH IN THE FAR INTERIOR.
[b]On Friday there arrived in the colony, by the steamship Albany, from Perth [says the Melbourne Argus], a most re markable individual, in the person of a West Australian aboriginal named Jungun, who appears to possess all the peculiarities of an albino.[b]
Thus, remarkable as it may appear, he is able to converse freely with both classes of natives, while they cannot all speak with each other. Last April, while at Lagrange Bay, in the Kim-berley district, Mr. M'Phee was present at a corroboree where there were several natives from inland.
[b]THUS, REMARKABLE AS IT MAY APPEAR, HE IS ABLE TO CONVERSE FREELY WITH BOTH CLASSES OF NATIVES, WHILE THEY CANNOT ALL SPEAK WITH EACH OTHER. LAST APRIL, WHILE AT LAGRANGE BAY, IN THE KIM-BERLEY DISTRICT, MR. M'PHEE WAS PRESENT AT A CORROBOREE WHERE THERE WERE SEVERAL NATIVES FROM INLAND.
THEY HAD NEVER BEFORE MET A WHITE MAN, BUT TOLD THE COASTAL NATIVES AT THE CORROBOREE THAT THEY HAD SEEN A MAN MANY HUNDREDS OF MILES INLAND VERY MUCH LIKE MR. M'PHEE, WITH WHOSE, TO THEM, STRANGE APPEARANCE THEY WERE STRUCK. THEY REMARKED THAT THEY HAD SEEN THE PERSON ALLUDED TO ONLY ONCE.
THE COASTAL NATIVES TOLD MR. M'PHEE WHAT THEY HAD HEARD, AND HE AT ONCE CONCLUDED THAT SOME UNFORTUNATE WHITE MAN WAS FIX THIS TEXTDRAGGING OUT A MISERABLE EXISTENCE IN THE INTERIOR AMONGST THE BLACKS, AND IN JULY LAST/
HE SET OUT FROM YINNERDONG WITH THE PHILANTHROPIC OBJECT OF RESCUING HIM. THIS ACTION IS THE MORE NOTEWORTHY AND CREDITABLE FROM THE FACT THAT MR. M'PHEE HAD NEVER BEEN OUT EXPLORING, and in July last he set out from Yinnerdong with the philanthropic object of rescuing him. This action is the more noteworthy and creditable from the fact that Mr. M'Phee had never been out exploring...
He took with him only two coastal natives, young fellows, who are still with him, and six horses, one of the latter to carry nothing but water-bags. Mr. M'Phee was armed with a first-class repeat-ing rifle and two excellent revolvers, his aboriginal companions also having a revolver each. The party travelled 150 miles before hearing of the supposed whiteman, their course lying through country traversed by no other European but Julius Brockman, the pioneer of the Kimberley district.
He had gone through that portion of the country endeavouring to find a short cut to the head of the Fitzroy River, but had to turn back owing to the want of water. Mr. M'Phee, although hearing now and again some shadowy information as to Fix this textthe "white man," after travelling the 150 miles already mentioned, heard nothing reliable until he had gone over 270 miles of country.
AT LAST, AFTER MANY MISLEAD-ING REPORTS [UNINTENTIONALLY MISLEADIUG HOWEVER, MR. M'PHEE STATES] HE DIS-COVERED THE INDIVIDUAL HE WAS IN QUEST OF, AND ON FIRST SEEING HIM THOUGHT HE WAS INDEED A WHITE MAN. SUBSEQUENT OBSERVATIONS, HOWEVER, SHOWED THAT THE MAN WAS WITHOUT DOUBT AN ABORI- GINAL ALBINO, FOR HE POSSESSED ALL THE CHARACTERISTICS ABOUT THE EYES &C, OF AN ALBINO.
HE AGREED TO GO WITH MR. M'PHEE TO THE SETTLEMENTS, BUT THE LATTER, WISHING TO SEE HIS PARENTS, ARRANGED TO MEET AT A CERTAIN WATERHOLE LATER ON. A FORTNIGHT AFTER-WARDS MR. M'PHEE, WITH THE SAME TWO ABORIGINALS, WENT OUT AGAIN ALONG THE SAME TRACK AND FOUND JUNGUN, WITH HIS FATHER, MOTHER, AND TWO SISTERS, ALL OF WHOM WERE JET BLACK, LIKE ANY OTHER ABORIGINALS.
IN EIGHT DAYS AFTERWARDS MR. M'PHEE, THE TWO COASTAL BLACKS, AND THE ALBINO WERE BACK AT LAGRANGE BAY, JUNGUN HAVING AGREED QUITE WILLINGLY TO LEAVE HIS RELATIONS FOR THE TIME BEING. MR. M'PHEE EXHIBITED HIM IN PERTH, WHERE NEARLY A THOUSAND PERSONS SAW HIM, INCLUDING MESSRS.
GILES AND FORREST, THE EXPLORERS, AND MANY OTHER PROMINENT PERSONS. MR. M'PHEE THEN RESOLVED TO BRING JUNGUN AND THE TWO BLACKS WHO WENT WITH FIX THIS TEXTHIM ON THE SEARCH TO MELBOURNE, AND THERE EXHIBIT THEM. TO DO THIS HE HAD TO GIVE UP HIS EMPLOYMENT, AND PAY A DEPOSIT OF £10 FOR EACH NATIVE TO THE ABORIGINAL BOARD FOR THEIR RETURN.
Mr. M'Phee will probably add to the party Jungun's relations, and exhibit the whole in London and elsewhere. Jun-gun proves to be a really remarkable indi-vidual. He is 27 years old, and 5ft. 7in. in height, and has most of the appearance of an Australian black, yet the colour of his skin is only a shade darker than that of a Chinaman. He has long wavy hair of a golden hue, and a full beard, sandy in colour.
THE SKIN ON THE CROWN OF THE HEAD IS PERFECTLY WHITE, AND MR. M'PHEE THINKS THAT HAD JUNGUN BEEN SHELTERED FROM THE WEATHER DURING CHILD-HOOD, AS IN THE CASE OF CIVILISED PEOPLE, HE WOULD PROBABLY HAVE BEEN AT THE PRESENT TIME AS WHITE AS MOST EUROPEANS. HIS BODY IS COVERED WITH HAIR ABOUT A QUARTER OF AN INCH LONG, PERFECTLY WHITE, AND THE EYES HAVE THE PECULIAR APPEARANCE SO WELL KNOWN IN ALBINOS. Jungun is very docile and obeys every word and gesture of Mr M'Phee, yet he has seen some rough times, for the top of his head is a mass of old wounds. There is not a square inch of surface without more than one large gash, and he is credited himself with having killed two men in battle Jungun was terribly frightened of the sea when he first saw it, and also of the horses, and even swans, having scarcely ever in his part of the country, which is mostly desert, seen a bird of any kind.
Yes, if the term "black" is not valid, THEN WHY DID EUROPEAN COLONIAL WRITERS USE IT EXTENSIVELY TO DESCRIBE AND ASCERTAIN GROUPS/PEOPLES IN THE PAST AND STILL DO TO THIS DAY? Obviously the term is valid and is correctly used by people in this forum if that is the case.
The only people who are trying to make this into an issue are basically trolls and asswipes like lioness. This should end this thread...
end thread/
Posts: 1558 | From: US | Registered: Sep 2015
| IP: Logged |
That so-called "bomb" is really a strawman attack I anticipated and nullified preemptively when I said what was quoted in the OP of this thread:
quote:No competent western, middle eastern or oriental academic who has seriously looked into this is going to use the term "black" (in a racial sense) when applied to dynastic Egyptians (although they might do it in a pigmentation sense, by saying they would have been dark brown).
Not that it worked, given the repeated strawman attacks... and mental constipation.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Swenet the odious, lying nutjob doesn't quit, does he? Gotta be some sort of personality disorder there...
I swing by this forum and still see the delusional loon, who avoided the hypothetical ancient Egyptian Hollywood casting question that I put to him 20 times, still making up sh1t about me...what kind of evasive, shameless freak avoids questions 20 times, and then still thinks themselves credible..anyway,I'm keeping my powder dry and trying not to waste time here, so much sh1t doing offline...I want to say more, reeaallly want to say more...but, for now, let's just say that I feel somewhat vindicated in my efforts...and that the following especially made me laugh....
quote: What's even more pathetic is that clowns like Tropicals Redacted have the audacity to pretend in public that Keita agrees with their position.
He doesn't (note that there is a convergence between Keita's views and the racist literature in terms of where Africans might cluster in cranio-facial analysis): https://youtu.be/qErhFiCvyKE?t=1m14s
Note that the man in the audience whom Keita is addressing talks just like Tropicals Redacted, Amun Ra and certain others here. From my experience, these people will simply NEVER get it. It's the same reason why you have 25 pages of this thread and so-called 'Egyptsearch veterans' arguing against what I'm saying with weak arguments. I bet that guy in that lecture is still going around repeating the same crap Keita told him to stay away from. Just like Tropicals Redacted, who has been repeatedly proven to be wrong, but still repeats his delusions.
When you confront these clowns they'll act like Keita is playing a game to 'please' European academics... that his caveats are 'optional' things that you can somehow take or leave. That's why I'm waiting for Tropicals Redacted to publish his "book" or "literature review" (lol!) and prove to the academics he's persecuting that he's more of a clown than them.
Also peep the mental blockage and how dense some of these people are. It's definitely a mental constipation thing that isn't going to go away any time soon, no matter how many times you try to explain it:
posted
"Making sh!t up"? Lol. This is exactly the type of flip floppery, back-tracking and lies I need records of.
This is what the fraud said originally about Keita:
quote:Originally posted by Tropicals Redacted: Courtesy of that guy Salassin, who recorded their conversation, Keita says something like: Shomarka doesn't call you black, only himself, that's political. (The exact quote is somewhere below.) My point is that he obviously knows what the score is regarding the racial backgrounds of the Egyptians, but comes across as aloof, and at the same time timid - he even tried to advise Sally-Ann Ashton against using 'black' as a racial descriptor when referencing the Egyptians. I don't like it that we're supposed to repress our common sense and intuition just to placate racists, whether they're on the internet or in academia. No way.
^Today, he's calling me a liar for calling this out:
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: When you confront these clowns they'll act like Keita is playing a game to 'please' European academics... that his caveats are 'optional' things that you can somehow take or leave. That's why I'm waiting for Tropicals Redacted to publish his "book" or "literature review" (lol!) and prove to the academics he's persecuting that he's more of a clown than them.
This is what the fraud originally said about Keita:
quote:Originally posted by Tropicals Redacted: I don't think I'm being radical, or diverging from the evidence here, but I'm pretty confident that if you took every indigenous ancient Egyptian skull ever found, and where possible, subjected them to 'blind' reconstruction under the supervision of someone with Keita-like knowledge...then most of the reconstructions would evoke someone of black African descent.
^Today, he's calling me a liar for calling this out:
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: What's even more pathetic is that clowns like Tropicals Redacted have the audacity to pretend in public that Keita agrees with their position.
He doesn't (note that there is a convergence between Keita's views and the racist literature in terms of where Africans might cluster in cranio-facial analysis):
Lol. The fraud tried to invoke Keita, but Keita doesn't even share his beliefs when it comes to African variability and rigid terminology. The fact that the fraud keeps lying about his previous embarrassing positions lets you know that he's in a compromising position juggling selective aspect of Keita's work and ignoring others. But the very aspects in Keita's work that the fraud is deliberately ignoring, is precisely what he's trying to cover up in public when he tries to make it seem like Keita is in support of the aforementioned views. So, in essence, the fraud is citing Keita, even though he's going against Keita. SMH. The result of which is what you see above... lying, flip flopping and backtracking to make the embarrassing mess he's created, seem congruent.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
The fraud just keeps lying. Here is another example illustrating that the parts he's been so dogmatic about towards the academics he's been persecuting, are supported by NO bio-anthropologist, not even Keita:
quote:Originally posted by Swenet on 18 june 2014: [Participant's name removed] what would you call an indigenous North African component which is closer to non-Africans than equatorial Africans due to prehistoric substructure, but still indigenous? See, this paradox can easily exist and is the root cause behind a debate that's raging on right now. One wouldn't see it as associated with a particular set of equatorial Africans because such a component would seem hybrid (i.e. African and non-African) in origin, even though it isn't. Read this article to understand how substructure works. This specific article concerns Neanderthals, but you can easily see how it would work with certain North African ancestry. Could one capture this sort of ancestry under "black diversity" when "blacks" themselves are genetically distant from it?
The fraud's reaction (even though that post wasn't directed towards him):
quote:Originally posted by Tropicals Redacted: That's a very good way of highlighting the potential complexities surrounding the issue. I would say that they're certainly African, and intuit that their skin colour/phenotype would have fallen within the range of what we call black.
Note the forceful attempt the fit all indigenous Africans who've historically inhabited Africa in a "black phenotype", even though the specifics of the situation calls for an approach that doesn't have these pitfalls. Again, the fraud is now going to lie about this damning deviation from what the evidence is saying. But there is no denying that his main beef with the academics he's persecuting isn't backed by Keita's work and the other bio-anthropologists he's citing.
Of course, the fraud just claimed I was lying for stating that Keita doesn't agree with him on these issues. Who's the liar, now?
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: What's even more pathetic is that clowns like Tropicals Redacted have the audacity to pretend in public that Keita agrees with their position.
He doesn't (note that there is a convergence between Keita's views and the racist literature in terms of where Africans might cluster in cranio-facial analysis):
posted
According to Keita's analysis (Keita 1990), a substantial amount (>40%) of first dynasty royal remains don't cluster as what this fraud calls "the black phenotype". (Actually, this is a somewhat problematic analysis to demonstrate this for several reasons [actual facial feature-based investigations, like the ones cited in Diop's work, could be more appropriate given the fraud's insistence on "black phenotype"] but it allows one to get an idea):
So, is the lying fraud being up front about this when he tries to:
1) bait academics into describing the AE as necessarily exhibiting a so-called "black African phenotype" (whatever the hell that means)?
2) create the impression that he's backed by Keita's and others' work when he's, in fact, going out on a limb while hiding behind Keita and others?
I don't think so. In my book that's called lying deliberately. In my book that's called 'you just wait and see how you're going to get torn apart when you go public'.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Correction.. the above is from Keita 1992, not Keita 1990.
quote:Originally posted by Tropicals Redacted: However, Keita points out that the light-skinned Berbers are indigenous Africans - generally, I wouldn't regard them as 'black'.
^Keep in mind that the fraud said that he doesn't regard light skinned Berber phenotypes as phenotypically 'black'. Let's look at what Keita says about the role that the Maghrebi/Berber cranio-facial pattern plays in dynastic Egypt:
The Maghreb series does have a modal pattern most similar to late lower dynastic Egyptians (Keita, 1990). —Keita 1992
The centroid values of the various upper Egyptian series viewed collectively are seen to vary over time. The general trend from Badari to Nakada times, and then from the Nakadan to the First Dynasty epochs demonstrate change toward the northern-Egyptian centroid value on Function I with similar values on Function 11. This might represent an average change from an Africoid (Keita, 1990) to a northern-Egyptian- Maghreb modal pattern. —Keita 1992
Here Keita says that the dynastic Egyptians were, morphologically speaking, typically somewhere between between two poles: the predynastic cranio-facial pattern and the Maghrebi cranio-facial pattern.
So, not only does Keita completely reject to his narrow, problematic terminology, but, according to this fraud's own self-contradicting commentary on Keita's views, he wouldn't consider a lot of dynastic Egyptians to have been phenotypically 'black'. So then, why is he insisting in public that phenotypically 'black' is a useful way to look at things and persecuting academics for holding out on such terminology?
Moreover, why is this fraud hiding behind Keita and other bio-anthroplogists who obviously don't agree with him?
And what happens when Keita entertains the idea these so-called "non-black Berbers" share a common ancestor with ancient Egyptians? What type of implications does that have for the fraud's misrepresentation of Keita and his self-contradicting use of 'black phenotype'?
The issue of how much Paleolithic migration from the Near East there may have been is intriguing, and the mitochondrial DNA variation may need to be reassessed as to what can be considered to be only of "Eurasian origin" because if hunters and gatherers roamed between the Saharan and supra-Saharan regions and Eurasia it might be difficult to determine exactly "where" a mutation arose. In any case the actual biocultural emergence of the archaeologically and historically attested Amazigh and Egyptians occurred in Africa; these peoples are not settler colonists in Africa. —Keita 2008
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
And just so we have it on record, in case he starts lying and acting like he doesn't know that he's been botching Keita deliberately. I already told the fraud in 2013 that many dynastic Egyptians had a similar cranio-facial pattern to his so-called "non-black" Berbers:
these pharaohs will plot somewhere in between the Naqada series and the Gizeh series (which is late dynastic).
And these Gizeh series, in turn, are halfway in between West Africans and Europeans. Unfortunately you can't see that here
Just taking a look...
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: The 19th dynasty Pharaoh's seem more halfway underway to[wards] modern Berbers and North Africans With the exception of some. Seti II looks [unambiguously] African to me. . . . But that's just me eyeballing.
So when he says that modern Maghrebis somehow aren't phenotypically 'black', but dynastic Egyptians with the same morphometric pattern aren't (under the same definition of the word), you know he's fidgeting with the data and with Keita's conclusion that dynastic Egyptian crania typically cluster with and somewhere in between predynastic Egyptians and dynastic lower Egyptians/Maghrebis.
Lol. Probably the greatest liar I've ever seen post on Egyptsearch and other anthro-fora. He literally lies about everything. Even the fact that he tampered with Kemp's quote. He actually thinks he's going to get away with his lies when he goes "public". SMH.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Nodnarb. I know you already know this (you cautiously worded your observations about these white supremacists by talking in relative terms), so the following is not a statement for you as much as it is intended to preemptively take away room for Doug to spin his foul lies. (So good job not feeding into his "defending racists" crap and keeping it nuanced).
Doug and others have been desperately attempting to paint this discussion as an attempt on my part to apologize for white supremacists. These people keep lying about me and what this discussion is about, so let's not give them the big break they're looking for by getting distracted re: the real reason why Doug is spinning all these lies:
Doug's internalized self-victimization narrative requires him to lie about these old texts and paint them as racists in EVERY aspect of their coverage of Africa and ancient Egypt. According to Doug, they ALL claimed that the AE were pale skinned and blue eyed.
My only point has been that they were racist in a LOT, but mostly not in terms of the comparative populations they felt were close to the AE. But even so, as you know, this is still no reason to start handing out medals because most of them were STILL racists and anti-African. They were still trying to downplay and obscure in other areas.
Another thing to keep in mind regarding the old literature is that it admitted this mainly about predynastic Egyptians and later Egyptians of the predynastic physical type (e.g. "the old Egyptian type"), not necessarily about all later dynastic Egyptians. So that's another reason to be cautious with their work. That's why in my posts you can see that I've constantly tried to keep the goalpost on what they said about predynastic Egyptians.
But yeah, I agree with you. Generally, the anthropologists trained in bio-anthropology and the ethnic background of the AE obviously made the right call in the aforementioned areas. As Keita said, most of the old reports are consistent with the AE being eastern Saharan once you look past the nominal "white race" BS (i.e. very dark skinned eastern Saharan were, as an intact CLADE, lumped into the so-called "white race"; not just the Egyptians in isolation as Doug is fabricating) and put said reports in a modern evolutionary context. The people in charge with disseminating this to the public completely obscured this layer of complexity. You can't reconstruct this eastern Saharan connection back from the watered down statements of the internet trolls, hollywood, the media and others who are disseminating the information in these old reports to the public.
You can tell from his posts that Doug belongs to this confused bunch who are too challenged and biased to read the old reports in context.
Just wanna say that after all these months and me being absent from here I still grasps your POV...
Just know that some of us are not misinterpreting you.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Good to know. The reason why I've let this drag on so long is because I know people are already plotting behind the scenes how they're going to spin their lies and blunders. I've seen them spin their lies behind the scenes, and now that I have hindsight I can see even more instances where they were fidgeting with the facts. So I know for a fact they're lying right now with their little behind the scenes conversations with so-called "PhDs". When you see that these psychos are lying to themselves and so-called "PhDs" that they debated academics on their own (when they don't even know how to read a diagram in a paper), you know you're dealing with a true pathological liar who is capable of lying about anything. So I'm nipping that sh!t in the bud, immediately, proactively and continuously. Once lies are in print, you're already too late.
So that's why I've made your thread the public go-to place for my views. I've changed my views in a lot of ways in response to new data while I wasn't posting here full-time. So when I come back here and I say certain things, it makes it easier for people to lie about my positions and get these crybaby bystanders emotional. In reality, anyone following my posts on the FB group since 2013 would see a smooth progression based on sound evidence and reasoning. Every time I changed my views I discussed it and said why. Sometimes I ended up making the wrong call (e.g. interpreting Henn et al's Maghrebi/Iberomaurusian component as completely Eurasian ancestry), but mostly I think I can safely say I was close a lot of times.
This is definitely not one of those cases where I was wrong. The Upper Palaeolithic phenotypically "negroid" people who came out of Egypt and left their DNA in the eastern and northern Mediterranean did not primarily have ancestry that's consistent with the racial use of "black" (see the separation between Dinka and the red branch leading to Gokhem and Iceman). Their skin color would have been like what is on the Wadi Sura caves (I'm not going to label that type of skin pigmentation 'black' because I know some are going to use that as license to flip flop to the racial use of the term). They were to some extent mixed with people who have ancestry consistent with that racial term (e.g. humid Sahara migrants) but all or most of that wouldn't have been their native ancestry.
That's why you see that the amount of SSA ancestry in the Middle East is completely different from what you would expect if Egypt had the same ancestry composition as, say, South Africa. Some people think they can ignore this. They try to pretend that it's not relevant that the amount of SSA-specific ancestry in the northern and eastern neighbors of Egypt is trivial.
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: We don't need a genetics chart to understand what racists mean when they say white. They mean skin color. That is the only thing that is relevant to this discussion.
This dude just doesn't get it. He's simply too slow to see the light, which is that aspects of the standard ES narrative were wrong and that select aspects of the old literature were right.
He's deluded to the point that he thinks genetics is irrelevant to settling the points of contention where there was friction between both schools of thought and thinks it's all a matter of skin color. Talk about mental constipation.
When Upper Palaeolithic aDNA from the ancestors of modern North Africans comes out, and it'll be parsed from possible outside influences, Doug and other clowns like Tropicals Redacted are going to be laughing stock and academics are going to eventually classify these buffoons in the same boat as creationists who think humans are 6000 years old.
Mark my words.
What on earth are you babbling on about? See how you jumped from the word black and white as references to skin color to Neantderthal DNA?
You are delusional and simply babbling.
Like I said, you lost this argument 20 pages ago but you believe just throwing around DNA and cranial metrics makes your dead argument look pretty in the casket.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: What on earth are you babbling on about? See how you jumped from the word black and white as references to skin color to Neantderthal DNA?
You are delusional and simply babbling.
Like I said, you lost this argument 20 pages ago but you believe just throwing around DNA and cranial metrics makes your dead argument look pretty in the casket.
Keep squeaking. I know who is talking—some random anonymous cat online who thinks there is meaning in calling every pre-colonial population in between the southern hemisphere and the northern tropic 'black'. But even then he makes wacky exceptions; if they brown-skinned, but have European ancestry, they're out of the boat of his 'black' category. Talk about special pleading. Yes, that's the same loony tune who thinks he's in any position to quibble with white supremacists he accuses of doing the same.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Doug, stop flip flopping.
According to you there are:
'Black' skinned Pinoy (Filipino folk) 'Black' skinned Indonesians 'Black' skinned aboriginals from the Philippines and elsewhere in the Pacific 'Black' skinned Africans 'Black' skinned South Asians 'Black' skinned Native Americans
But somehow 'black' skinned "Europids" is an inherent contradiction? If you think it's a contradiction and you bar "Europids" from having 'black' skin, it's because you're racializing 'black' and because you have all sorts of sneaky rules, exceptions and racial politics considerations when it comes to discerning who has 'black' skin.
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: What on earth are you babbling on about? See how you jumped from the word black and white as references to skin color to Neantderthal DNA?
You are delusional and simply babbling.
Like I said, you lost this argument 20 pages ago but you believe just throwing around DNA and cranial metrics makes your dead argument look pretty in the casket.
Keep squeaking. I know who is talking—some random anonymous cat online who thinks there is meaning in calling every pre-colonial population in between the southern hemisphere and the northern tropic 'black'. But even then he makes wacky exceptions; if they brown-skinned, but have European ancestry, they're out of the boat of his 'black' category. Talk about special pleading. Yes, that's the same loony tune who thinks he's in any position to quibble with white supremacists he accuses of doing the same.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Doug, stop flip flopping.
According to you there are:
'Black' skinned Pinoy (Filipino folk) 'Black' skinned Indonesians 'Black' skinned aboriginals from the Philippines and elsewhere in the Pacific 'Black' skinned Africans 'Black' skinned South Asians 'Black' skinned Native Americans
But somehow 'black' skinned "Europids" is an inherent contradiction? If you think it's a contradiction and you bar "Europids" from having 'black' skin, it's because you're racializing 'black' and because you have all sorts of sneaky rules, exceptions and racial politics considerations when it comes to discerning who has 'black' skin.
Flip flopper.
What is 'black' skin? I thought that according to you 'black' is not a valid term for skin color?
See how you are flip flopping yourself in a thread where you have spent 25+ pages chasing your tail in circles?
Now you use the same word you claim isn't VALID in any discussion of biology to try and salvage some sort of 'victory'. But you just contradicted yourself. If 'black' skin doesn't exist, why are you so determined to associate it with Europe?
So stick to the point. Is there such a thing as skin color that can be described as 'black'? Yes or no?
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: See how you are flip flopping yourself in a thread where you have spent 25+ pages chasing your tail in circles?
Quote the alleged flip flops right now or it did not happen.
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: the same word you claim isn't VALID in any discussion of biology to try and salvage some sort of 'victory'. But you just contradicted yourself.
'Black' in terms of skin pigmentation is not quantifiable and it's problematic for a variety of reasons (albeit far less problematic than certain other uses), sure. I wouldn't necessarily say 'black' in reference to skin is "invalid". The reason why I've said it's problematic isn't because I think it's "invalid". When people use 'black' in reference to a range of brown skin pigmentation they know it's figurative so it's not a matter of "valid" or "invalid". That's like asking "Is a fictional theater play valid". You're not making any sense.
But since you say I've contradicted myself by using the term in a condoning manner, let's see you quote where I've used it in this way. And if you're referring to the instances in which I merely provide commentary on the term 'black' there is something really wrong with you.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote: ^Good to know. The reason why I've let this drag on so long is because I know people are already plotting behind the scenes how they're going to spin their lies and blunders. I've seen them spin their lies behind the scenes, and now that I have hindsight I can see even more instances where they were fidgeting with the facts. So I know for a fact they're lying right now with their little behind the scenes conversations with so-called "PhDs". When you see that these psychos are lying to themselves and so-called "PhDs" that they debated academics on their own (when they don't even know how to read a diagram in a paper), you know you're dealing with a true pathological liar who is capable of lying about anything. So I'm nipping that sh!t in the bud, immediately, proactively and continuously. Once lies are in print, you're already too late.
So-called PhDs? The boy's lost it. Tragic.
Swenet, how many times did you avoid the Hollywood question? Twenty. Just because you couldn't face the reality of referring to Ethiopians and Somalis as black. Buffoon.
See how your deranged insistence on being right makes you look like a clown?
Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013
| IP: Logged |
quote: You've made a thread about Frank Yurco's antics regarding the appearance of Egyptians in certain versions of the book of gates. I believe the biases of many Egyptologists regarding the evidence of a predominantly African Egypt, including the Egyptologists under discussion here, are all symptoms of the same disease.
I do not believe Wilkinson or Kemp would ever go to the lengths of misinforming the public as much as certain researchers in the Theban Mapping Project and Yurco have done in the past, but they all display symptoms of the same disposition.
Thanks for bringing the Barry Kemp issue to our attention, its always good to know that some scholars, who on the surface seem to be on your wavelength, are saying contradicting stuff elsewhere.
BTW, this happens with Physical Anthropologists too. Not too long ago, a poster named Charlie Bass exposed a female Physical Anthropologist name K Godde, who concluded from her cranio-facial work in '09 that Nubians and Egyptians were mostly indistinguishable, and that some Nubian groups were closer to Egyptians than some Egyptians were to those Egyptian samples.
She cited Keita and also synthesized a lot of work in the area, which generally came to the same conclusion (about Egypto-Nubian mutual inclusivity).
She said a lot of things that were off in what she thought would remain a private email conversation between her and Sundiata (another poster who emailed her), but the thing that struck me as flatout bizarre and surreal, is that she actually believed we'd have to go back to Homo Erectus to find a common ancestor between the Nubian population, and the Egyptian population!!
In private, she also said Nubians were distinct from Sub Saharan Africans, even though she cites Keita, and notes several times that Nubians and Ancient Egyptians also show ties to Sub Saharan people.
I guess the thing to be learned from this all is to generally not make assumptions about the views of researchers who cite the same/similar studies we're citing to reinforce our positions, even if they explicitly lend credence to those works.
posted
^See what I mean when I say that he's a bald-faced liar?
You (Beyoku) were there the entire time so you know the various papers that were influential in my thinking. He knows about the same papers and changes in my thinking, because he's seen me comment on them and adjust my views, IN REAL TIME, as the papers were coming out. Real time:
quote: Definition of real time : the actual time during which something takes place "the computer may partly analyze the data in real time (as it comes in) — R. H. March"
But we don't even have to take it there (i.e. talk about evolution in my views in response to better data) because I know for a fact that even then, in 2012, I told his lying ass that those SSA-lower Nile Valley ties I talked about in that 2012 private exchange were exactly that—ties.
quote:Full Definition of tie 1 a : a line, ribbon, or cord used for fastening, uniting, or drawing something closed; especially : shoelace b (1) : a structural element (as a rod or angle iron) holding two pieces together : a tension member in a construction (2) : any of the transverse supports to which railroad rails are fastened to keep them in line 2 : something that serves as a connecting link: as a : a moral or legal obligation to someone or something typically constituting a restraining power, influence, or duty b : a bond of kinship or affection
I DARE his lying dumb ass to prove me wrong. I NEVER said, implied or left room for interpretation that SSAs can accommodate ALL (pre)dynastic Egyptian and Nubian variations or the other way around.
Like I said earlier, I'm very appreciative of all these records of his bald-faced lies.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
This was the liar in 2013 walking on eggshells around me in private conversations when it came to Egyptians and Nubians being primarily developments on eastern Saharan soil, not as-is transplants from SSA. He knew I didn't play that partisanship crap he's now trying to associate me with:
29-10-2013
quote:Ok. So it's fair to say that the image of the woman was Egyptian royalty, even though the identification is unclear? Whilst remembering the caveats around stereotyping and the fact of diversity, does the image strike you as African?
Somewhere down the line that liar thought he knew it all and started changing his tune. He can't even read and understand a paper but this dumb ass actually thought he could lecture people on the Egyptian skeletal record. Classic case of hubris-fueled novice trying to bite the hand that feeds him:
22-06-2014
quote:then most of the reconstructions would evoke someone of black African descent
posted
I have a piss easy time with the debates like the one on http://historum.com
To put it simple its 90% framing and the truth is on your side. One key is to not deal in absolutes. I simply contend that Ancient Egypt was by the common dictionary/state/nation definitions of black, black in abundance and Greece was a far better example of a multiracial society as defined by modern terms. I like to keep it simple too with lots of pics. One picture of baby oil and afro-picks are worth several anthropological studies on limb ratios.
Never use the term Nubian. Trust me on that one.
Also when people post picks of modern Egyptians go to the history of occupations. Always note that Greece moved their capital there. Egypt wasnt just invaded it was occupied by people who had to bring enough manpower to not just quail insurrection but to progress against the Sudan until future invading forces came in even greater numbers to remove them. Then post pictures of ancient Egyptians and ask has their skin lightened?
When people argue that Egypt is not close to African Americans break out tribal history and culture. Example.
posted
As soon as Doug is asked to back up the alleged "flip flops" he's accused me of, he's nowhere to be seen.
Also note how deliberately silent Doug was every time I proved him wrong about his fabrication that Eurocentric bio-anthropologists were engaging in pseudo-science when their measurements seemingly supported their argument.
The Eurocentric scholars who assigned dark skinned Africans to the "white race" were doing the same thing Doug is doing when he's assigning precolonial non-African populations in the tropics to his 'black' category. But now it turns out that he is even going a step further than that. Here, in Doug's own words:
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Wow Clyde. It seems you have come full circle after disagreeing with me on this when I said it in the past.
But that said, I still don't rule out direct contact from Africa over the centuries before European contact. The problem is finding the evidence. Not only that, I also believe there was contact with other parts of the world as well.... but that is a whole different subject.
^Over the last 25 thread pages he ranted on and on about Eurocentric appropriation. Look what he says in the other forum (note that he was careful not to ever say that here). This lunatic is obviously engaging in appropriation as well. But he thinks he's somehow a special snowflake. Uniquely victimized by Eurocentric appropriation.
posted
Thanks to lioness' pic (which captures a good deal of UP European cranio-facial variation) I can convey the point I've been making throughout this thread, better.
UP Europeans (left) and holocene Nile Valley Africans (right)
^Based on eyeballing, the African one in the middle (in the right hand pic) shows a good degree of general resemblance to two of the UP European ones. The two other African ones also show resemblances to the UP Europeans, but more in isolated parts of their faces, mandibles and neurocrania. In the ancestors of these North Africans the relationships would be even more obvious.
Note how, every time I bring this up, Doug keeps skirting around the fact that these two sets would show a lot of general overlap to the exclusion of most Sub-Saharan populations when subjected to PCA.
Doug also keeps skirting around the fact that this EMPIRICAL FACT plays a role in Eurocentric appropriation. Doug is simply lying at this point and trying to keep his self-victimization narrative from getting blown to smithereens.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes: One picture of baby oil and afro-picks are worth several anthropological studies on limb ratios.
Word of advice, take is as you wish....
If this is the case then yall are not having an intellectual discussion. I would suggest to stay far away from habits like this, you could do this for years and your own understanding of the science and bio-cultural origins of the region will not advance one iota. We would fast forward to year 2020 and you would be asking questions about Basal Eurasian, Ethio-Somali or the origin and distribution of A3b2 - Stuff that you should know right now.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes: One picture of baby oil and afro-picks are worth several anthropological studies on limb ratios.
Word of advice, take is as you wish....
If this is the case then yall are not having an intellectual discussion. I would suggest to stay far away from habits like this, you could do this for years and your own understanding of the science and bio-cultural origins of the region will not advance one iota. We would fast forward to year 2020 and you would be asking questions about Basal Eurasian, Ethio-Somali or the origin and distribution of A3b2 - Stuff that you should know right now.
I'm not saying there isnt an intellectual aspect to this thread but one fact makes this thread 90% Uckery and 10% intellectual.
Race is all opinion and nothing but opinion.
Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote: Tropically adapted groups also have relatively longer distal limb elements (tibia and radius, as compared to femur and humerus) than groups in colder climates.
Matt Cartmill, Fred H. Smith - 2011 - Social Science
The Human Lineage
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote: Tropically adapted groups also have relatively longer distal limb elements (tibia and radius, as compared to femur and humerus) than groups in colder climates.
Matt Cartmill, Fred H. Smith - 2011 - Social Science
The Human Lineage
This has already been explained to me but thanks. My point was that since race is what you make of it I personally take more from afro-picks, waves, extensions, and oil for the skin than what essentially equates to lankiness and heat dissipation.
Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes: This has already been explained to me but thanks. My point was that since race is what you make of it I personally take more from afro-picks, waves, extensions, and oil for the skin than what essentially equates to lankiness and heat dissipation. [/QB]
what you are interpreting as afro picks are not afro picks
^this is a victorian comb. It's called an ornamental comb. You stick it in your hair and leave it there. The top part is sticking out as decoration
here's more decorative combs:
Ornamental combs, ancient Egypt
____________________________________
This one is for actually combing your hair (or wig)
comb, Amarna, 18th Dynasty (New Kingdom), c.1352-1356 BC
Comb, Amarna, Dynasty 18, reign of Akhenaten (1353-1336 BCE), Wood Egyptians carved double-sided combs much like modern examples with thick teeth on one side and fine teeth along the other. Ancient hairstyles, especially those of women, were often quite elaborate. Combs like this would have been used for both natural hair and for wigs which were worn by both men and women.
Double-Sided Ivory Comb - BF.125
Origin: Egypt Circa: 1500 BC to 1100 BC Dimensions: 2.80" (7.1cm) high x 3.75" (9.5cm) wide Collection: Egyptian Antiquities Style: New Kingdom Medium: Wood and Paint For ancient Egyptians, appearance was an important issue. Appearance indicated a person’s status, role in a society or political significance. Like modern hairstyles, Egyptian hairstyles varied over time. During the Old Kingdom, hair was usually worn short. Some shaved their heads and then wore a wig when going to social events or for protection from the sun. During the New Kingdom Period, the style was to wear the hair longer and sometimes braided. Children’s heads were shaved, except for a braid on the left side, until they hit puberty. Combs of the New Kingdom were either single or double-sided and made from wood or bone. The hot dry atmosphere in Egypt helps to preserve wood that was normally imported from other countries. Traces of red paint are still visible on this comb. Some of them were finely made with long grips. Combs have been found among early tomb goods, even those dating from Predynastic times. This comb may have been part of a funeral equipment. -
quote:Originally posted by lioness: what you are interpreting as afro picks are not afro picks
They might be afro picks, but you're partially right, they're not NECESSARILY afro picks.
But he knows they weren't necessarily afro picks. But you gotta play along with the kumbaya game. This is the point at which we're supposed to say "Wow, really? Afro picks. Damn. They all had afro-type hair". *Wink, wink*.
People in this topic are like the weak-minded dude in matrix that couldn't deal with the truth and wanted the amnesia pill to go back to the lie aka the matrix. Doug and certain other washed up 'vets' are spearheading the movement. All you have to do to sign up is play along and act like you never seen a study on ancient Egyptian hair types, skeletal remains, etc.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote: Tropically adapted groups also have relatively longer distal limb elements (tibia and radius, as compared to femur and humerus) than groups in colder climates.
Matt Cartmill, Fred H. Smith - 2011 - Social Science
The Human Lineage
This has already been explained to me but thanks. My point was that since race is what you make of it I personally take more from afro-picks, waves, extensions, and oil for the skin than what essentially equates to lankiness and heat dissipation.
Oh, ok.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes: This has already been explained to me but thanks. My point was that since race is what you make of it I personally take more from afro-picks, waves, extensions, and oil for the skin than what essentially equates to lankiness and heat dissipation
"what you are interpreting as afro picks are not afro picks"
quote:Origins of the Afro Comb follows the evolution of the comb from pre-dynastic Egypt to modern-day, tracing the similarities in form and the remarkablediversity of designs found across Africa and the African Diaspora.
quote: Careful removal of the upper layer of matting and linen pads around the head resulted in the preservation of her entire head of hair, revealing a shoulder-length style of natural waves extending c.22cm from the crown of the head with a left side parting and asymmetrical fringe made up of S-shaped curls bordering the forehead. In addition to the excellent preservation of the cranial hair, the right eyebrow also survived.
quote:Finely carved ivory combs and knife handles produced toward the end of Egypt's prehistory demonstrate the high standards Egyptian artists had achieved, even before the Old Kingdom. This comb may have been part of the funeral equipment of an elite person who lived about 5,200 years ago. Parts of the comb's teeth, now missing, can be seen along the bottom edge. The detailed decoration suggests that it was a ceremonial object, not just an instrument for arranging the hair. On both sides are figures of animals in horizontal rows, a spatial organization familiar from later Egyptian art. The animals include elephants and snakes; wading birds and a giraffe; hyenas; cattle; and perhaps boars. Similar arrangements of these creatures on other carved ivory implements suggest that the arrangement and choice of animals were not haphazard. Elephants treading on snakes suggest that this part of the scene was symbolic. The mythologies of many African peoples associate elephants and serpents with the creation of the universe. The uppermost row of this comb may symbolize a creative deity to whom the rest of the animals owe their existence. Comb, Predynastic Period, ca. 3200 B.C. Egyptian Ivory; H. 2 1/4 in. (5.7 cm)
Theodore M. Davis Collection, Bequest of Theodore M. Davis, 1915 (30.8.224)
quote: Six ivory combs were found in the same area of the tomb. One of them has carved on its top the figurine of an animal with long legs and a prominent nose, but broken off ears. It is possibly a donkey. The other five combs have flat tops and are square or rectangular in shape. These are all made of hippopotamus ivory.
quote:Originally posted by lioness: what you are interpreting as afro picks are not afro picks
They might be afro picks, but you're partially right, they're not NECESSARILY afro picks.
yes, some of the combs might also function as "afro picks".
I think it's the other way around. I think they were originally afro picks (look at their overall shape, you can't deny that they're tailored to afro type hair) and then later the traditional designs were maintained even when they diffused to (North) African populations who might not all have had majorities with afro type hair.
When the designs and dimensions of a cultural item (in this case, narrow combs with elongated handles and needles) is constrained over thousands of years it's not a coincidence. Yes, Europeans might have had similar shaped combs here and there but the shapes of their combs were much more varied (e.g. including combs with wider shapes).
Read this again. The combs are part of a larger cultural complex:
And many of these people would have had afro hair. Captives with afro hair either indigenous to predynastic Egypt or some place nearby on predynastic palette:
quote:"this is a victorian comb. It's called an ornamental comb. You stick it in your hair and leave it there. The top part is sticking out as decoration"
That is what whites like you do, but the combs at Hierakonpolis had a different purpose. But yeah, you can leave in the hair!
quote: Raw footage taken in the Cairo Museum of several Afro wigs dating to the 18th Dynasty found in the tomb of a high priest of Amun from Thebes, modern day Luxor. The wigs are all human hair with added braided extensions in the back. They were coated with animal fats and beeswax.
quote: The waters of this well are reputed to be effective in curing skin complaints and those who make use of it are still in the habit of leaving behind offerings of soap and combs.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: [qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes: This has already been explained to me but thanks. My point was that since race is what you make of it I personally take more from afro-picks, waves, extensions, and oil for the skin than what essentially equates to lankiness and heat dissipation
You are desperate, jealous and dishonest. [QB]
Of what and about what? You are proving my point. Afro-picks, skin oil, weaves, hair extensions and you left out waves
have more to do with how people define race than lankiness.
When I bring up how some white people are very lanky just in terms of having long arms and legs people bring up limb ratios between bones which might be more signature to modern people called black or white but this is never demonstrated because its never been tested. Is a white dude like Cole Aldrich who very long arms and wide shoulders have an African body type or does his limb ratio still cluster with white people? The answer is only going to be theory because its not tested.
Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
^There are a few people here who don't know who the quotes are arranged. And you are one of them, Fourty2Tribes. Look at the post again, and look at the first name; Originally posted by "the lioness". That's the person being addressed. Your name appeared second.
And if you use logic, you can see what my post is about. So logically it conveys a story.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
And many of these people would have had afro hair. Captives with afro hair either indigenous to predynastic Egypt or some place nearby on predynastic palette:
[/QB]
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
And many of these people would have had afro hair. Captives with afro hair either indigenous to predynastic Egypt or some place nearby on predynastic palette:
[/QB]
You cannot tell much about ethnicity based on the hair and beard depicted here. Asian, African, ?, etc
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ LOL at the above, the same nonsense euronut game again.
This is more than just pathetic. It shows how mentally sick AND racist you are. What is the background of these folks you posted, please? lol
Now the indigenous people are being swiped away quickly by lioness, and replaced by cold adapted europeans, for political convenience. Typical. Cool African American black woman imposter.
quote: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
[...]
Any interpretation of the biological affinities of the ancient Egyptians must be placed in the context of hypothesis informed by the archaeological, linguistic, geographic or other data.
In this context the physical anthropological evidence indicates that the early Nile Valley populations can be identified as part of an African lineage, but exhibiting local variation.
This variation represents the short and long term effects of evolutionary forces, such as gene flow, genetic drift, and natural selection influenced by culture and geography"
--Kathryn A. Bard (STEPHEN E. THOMPSON Egyptians, physical anthropology of Physical anthropology)
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^It's called being objective, the hair type and ethnicity is unknown on that palette. They are not Egyptians, it is unknown who they are
For instance, are they African or Asian? How light is their skin? You can't tell be looking at the palette and I think SOY Keita would agree with me. That is called being scientific and not assuming things without basis -not "euronut" or "sick"
Enough paranoia and slander. It's your knee-jerk reactions at play again
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: ^It's called being objective, the hair type and ethnicity is unknown on that palette. They are not Egyptians, it is unknown who they are
For instance, are they African or Asian? How light is their skin? You can't tell be looking at the palette and I think SOY Keita would agree with me. That is called being scientific and not assuming things without basis -not "euronut" or "sick"
Enough paranoia and slander. It's your knee-jerk reactions at play again
It is not objective, it's dumb and stupid game you play as usually. Especially after the post prior to this one, it's even more stupid. That is why you are laughing stock and known as a racist! You are a coward who hides behind a character, as an; "American American black woman". smh
Knee-jerk reactions are when you post random pics of folks who's background you don't know. You've posted those same pictures how many times? For multiple historical purposes, on many continents at different time zones. lol And now again try to push them as a relevant argument to proto-Egyptians. But at the same time, Africans in recent or classical Europe you'll fight off with tooth and nail as you become paranoid. Totally dishonest, a racist and a liar you are. lol
quote:"Many of the sites reveal evidence of important interactions between Nilotic and Saharan groups during the formative phases of the Egyptian Predynastic Period (e.g. Wadi el-Hôl, Rayayna, Nuq’ Menih, Kurkur Oasis). Other sites preserve important information regarding the use of the desert routes during the Protodynastic and Pharaonic Periods, particularly during periods of political and military turmoil in the Nile Valley (e.g. Gebel Tjauti, Wadi el-Hôl)."
quote:Pleistocene through to the Christian periods, reveals a break in population continuity between the Pleistocene (Jebel Sahaba) and the Final Neolithic (Gebel Ramlah, dating to the first half of the fifth millennium BC) samples. The dental traits from Jebel Sahaba align more closely with modern sub-Saharan populations, while Gebel Ramlah and later align closer to Egypt specifically and to the Sahara in general."
--Michael Brass
Reconsidering the emergence of social complexity in early Saharan pastoral societies, 5000 – 2500 B.C.
quote:"As a result of their facial prognathism, the Badarian sample has been described as forming a morphological cluster with Nubian, Tigrean, and other southern (or "Negroid") groups (Morant, 1935, 1937; Mukherjee et al., 1955; Nutter, 1958, Strouhal, 1971; Angel, 1972; Keita, 1990). Cranial nonmetric trait studies have found this group to be similar to other Egyptians, including much later material (Berry and Berry, 1967, 1972), but also to be significantly different from LPD material (Berry et al., 1967). Similarly, the study of dental nonmetric traits has suggested that the Badarian population is at the centroid of Egyptian dental samples (Irish, 2006), thereby suggesting similarity and hence continuity across Egyptian time periods. From the central location of the Badarian samples in Figure 2, the current study finds the Badarian to be relatively morphologically close to the centroid of all the Egyptian samples. The Badarian have been shown to exhibit greatest morphological similarity with the temporally successive EPD (Table 5). Finally, the biological distinctiveness of the Badarian from other Egyptian samples has also been demonstrated (Tables 6 and 7).
These results suggest that the EDyn do form a distinct morphological pattern. Their overlap with other Egyptian samples (in PC space, Fig. 2) suggests that although their morphology is distinctive, the pattern does overlap with the other time periods. These results therefore do not support the Petrie concept of a \Dynastic race" (Petrie, 1939; Derry, 1956). Instead, the results suggest that the Egyptian state was not the product of mass movement of populations into the Egyptian Nile region, but rather that it was the result of primarily indigenous development combined with prolonged small-scale migration, potentially from trade, military, or other contacts.
This evidence suggests that the process of state formation itself may have been mainly an indigenous process, but that it may have occurred in association with in-migration to the Abydos region of the Nile Valley. This potential in-migration may have occurred particularly during the EDyn and OK. A possible explanation is that the Egyptian state formed through increasing control of trade and raw materials, or due to military actions, potentially associated with the use of the Nile Valley as a corridor for prolonged small scale movements through the desert environment."
--Sonia R. Zakrzewski. (2007). Population Continuity or Population Change: Formation of the Ancient Egyptian State. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 132:501-509)
quote:Originally posted by lioness: ^It's called being objective, the hair type and ethnicity is unknown on that palette.
All the defeated figures on the fragments of that palette have afro type hair, seemingly without exception. Are you saying you know of a West Eurasian population where afro type hair is the modal phenotype? Yes or no. Don't skirt around the question.
quote:Originally posted by lioness: They are not Egyptians, it is unknown who they are
The prospect of them being predynastic Egyptian natives unsettles you, doesn't it? I've never said they were necessarily inhabitants of Egypt. Yet, for some reason, you feel the need to rule this out. Then you strangely admit that you don't know their origin. So why do you rule something out when you don't have any grounds to do so?
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lioness: ^It's called being objective, the hair type and ethnicity is unknown on that palette.
All the defeated figures on the fragments of that palette have afro type hair,
It could be afro hair but how do we know it's not non-afro curly hair?
How was Afro-hair depicted during classical and ancient times? Ps, impostor black woman, Afro-hair has many textures, also that of a loose type, aka "curly".
quote: The Narmer Palette: The victorious king of the south
The reverse side
A few palettes from the predynastic period have been found, some like the Bull Palette similar in content and style to the Narmer Palette which was found at Hierakonpolis and dates to about 3200 BCE.
Topic Closed
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic