posted
I am not sure how your statement relates to Queen Nefertiti. Could you elaborate your point? Thanks.
quote:Originally posted by Thereal: @frank people can use whatever color or name to describe themselves, here's a lady who is have Ghanaian and Japan,Karen nun ira.
quote:Originally posted by Frankly Kemet: okay, so, basically you subscribe to the social construct of race but acknowledge its unscientific validity. In other words, you are willing to dabble in pseudoscience if it suits your agenda to convey a belief of yours. Is that a fair assessment?
Race isn't biologically valid, but it is a real social construct that has real life impact to human beings based on their appearance. If I discuss race, I am not discussing "race" as a biological construct but a sociological one. Which means if I discuss race, it'd be to discuss aspects of appearance that harbor social impact.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Frankly Kemet: okay, so, basically you subscribe to the social construct of race but acknowledge its unscientific validity. In other words, you are willing to dabble in pseudoscience if it suits your agenda to convey a belief of yours. Is that a fair assessment?
Race isn't biologically valid, but it is a real social construct that has real life impact to human beings based on their appearance. If I discuss race, I am not discussing "race" as a biological construct but a sociological one. Which means if I discuss race, it'd be to discuss aspects of appearance that harbor social impact.
Two part question: (1) In the United States, is a dark skin with curly hair North African treated the same as an African American? (2) Is there a color, hair texture and facial phenotype hierarchy in the US?
Posts: 115 | From: NYC | Registered: Feb 2018
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: A social construct is something imaginary
Therefore things can exist physically
and imaginary things also exist if a society believes them.
I pose the same questions to you. In this social construction of race, by what trait are you categorized? Only skin tone or other traits besides skin tone?
Posts: 115 | From: NYC | Registered: Feb 2018
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: A social construct is something imaginary
Therefore things can exist physically
and imaginary things also exist if a society believes them.
I pose the same questions to you. In this social construction of race, by what trait are you categorized? Only skin tone or other traits besides skin tone?
Many people in this forum say that "black" is skin color alone.
However the word is mainly applied to brown skinned people and there is no agreed in standard as to what level of brownness constitutes "black" or logical explanation as to calling brown people black.
The average European subscribes to this color only somewhat. They might call a light brown Turk "black" , depending on the country
But most Americans define "black" as "African looking" and includes hair and feature traits as well.
a) brown skin b) afro hair c) broad features
According to the American habits you can have 2 out of 3 and be black
Other people say the terms "white and "black" are stereotypes, unqualifiable obsolete terms and should not be used to categorize people as a social construct or in any form
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Frankly Kemet: okay, so, basically you subscribe to the social construct of race but acknowledge its unscientific validity. In other words, you are willing to dabble in pseudoscience if it suits your agenda to convey a belief of yours. Is that a fair assessment?
Race isn't biologically valid, but it is a real social construct that has real life impact to human beings based on their appearance. If I discuss race, I am not discussing "race" as a biological construct but a sociological one. Which means if I discuss race, it'd be to discuss aspects of appearance that harbor social impact.
Two part question: (1) In the United States, is a dark skin with curly hair North African treated the same as an African American? (2) Is there a color, hair texture and facial phenotype hierarchy in the US?
Yes, they can be treated the same. Many darker to mid tone northern Africans look like many blacks in the United States.
These kids:
Look distinct from a lot of west African blacks, but they look like a lot of blacks in the U.S. This is why a lot of blacks (especially in the U.S) don't think of everyone in North Africa as one race. Calling them "whites" fantasy.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
These Asian men, they have black skin like Black Americans but their hair and facial features are wholly different. When they come to America, are they categorized under the race "Black" and are they socially treated the same way as blacks?
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Frankly Kemet:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: A social construct is something imaginary
Therefore things can exist physically
and imaginary things also exist if a society believes them.
I pose the same questions to you. In this social construction of race, by what trait are you categorized? Only skin tone or other traits besides skin tone?
Many people in this forum say that "black" is skin color alone.
However the word is mainly applied to brown skinned people and there is no agreed in standard as to what level of brownness constitutes "black" or logical explanation as to calling brown people black.
The average European subscribes to this color only somewhat. They might call a light brown Turk "black" , depending on the country
But most Americans define "black" as "African looking" and includes hair and feature traits as well.
a) brown skin b) afro hair c) broad features
According to the American habits you can have 2 out of 3 and be black
Other people say the terms "white and "black" are stereotypes, unqualifiable obsolete terms and should not be used to categorize people as a social construct or in any form
quote:Originally posted by Frankly Kemet: okay, so, basically you subscribe to the social construct of race but acknowledge its unscientific validity. In other words, you are willing to dabble in pseudoscience if it suits your agenda to convey a belief of yours. Is that a fair assessment?
Race isn't biologically valid, but it is a real social construct that has real life impact to human beings based on their appearance. If I discuss race, I am not discussing "race" as a biological construct but a sociological one. Which means if I discuss race, it'd be to discuss aspects of appearance that harbor social impact.
Two part question: (1) In the United States, is a dark skin with curly hair North African treated the same as an African American? (2) Is there a color, hair texture and facial phenotype hierarchy in the US?
Yes, they can be treated the same. Many darker to mid tone northern Africans look like many blacks in the United States.
These kids:
Look distinct from a lot of west African blacks, but they look like a lot of blacks in the U.S. This is why a lot of blacks (especially in the U.S) don't think of everyone in North Africa as one race. Calling them "whites" fantasy.
posted
we are dealing with a common or average look. You would have better footing to argue the two men look Dominican. They more than likely would be treated as Hispanics in the US.
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: The guy in the red shirt is the redbone or high yellow prince looking guy in the pews.
His look does exist among African Americans, but it's a lot less common than the southern Egyptian look.
posted
Your example falls within the range of an Afro-American look. But you ignored the example I provided of the North Africans with brown complexion and curly hair who are unmistakenly NOT AA. Like the Lioness pointed out, how black is viewed in American society is based on several physical traits, not just one as you imply.
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: This is the black situation, especially with Saharan Africa.
A man is treated as black and subject to some of the cruelest experiences ever recorded, but he looks like this:
Sees people that there were Africans that built pyramids that look like this:
But is told that blacks are only blacks if they look like this:
quote:Originally posted by Frankly Kemet: we are dealing with a common or average look. You would have better footing to argue the two men look Dominican. They more than likely would be treated as Hispanics in the US.
The average look doesn't mean that people that deviate a bit from the average aren't black or aren't AA. Europeans are still trained to look at a man that looks like this:
And know he's black. "Hispanic" is also not a race. Not that it really matters though honestly. I didn't say all of North Africa looked black, and many people in Cairo especially a lot of Copts do not look black at all. Though as most people mention here, Egyptian culture came south to north, not north to south.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Frankly Kemet: we are dealing with a common or average look. You would have better footing to argue the two men look Dominican. They more than likely would be treated as Hispanics in the US.
The average look doesn't mean that people that deviate a bit from the average aren't black or aren't AA. Europeans are still trained to look at a man that looks like this:
And know he's black. "Hispanic" is also not a race. Not that it really matters though honestly. I didn't say all of North Africa looked black, and many people in Cairo especially a lot of Copts do not look black at all. Though as most people mention here, Egyptian culture came south to north, not north to south.
so lets try to bring this full circle, what are the physical markers Americans look for to identify someone as racially "Black"?
Posts: 115 | From: NYC | Registered: Feb 2018
| IP: Logged |
posted
@frank I'm not sure why you're hard pressed on trying to define people of African descent,if you accept the out of Africa event then it's easy to explain humanity the issue is whether you're a contemporary or ancient African and whether the contemporary African have remain the same or change because of a reduction in genetic diversity and possibly population replacement throughout the ages.
Posts: 1123 | From: New York | Registered: Feb 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Thereal: @frank I'm not sure why you're hard pressed on trying to define people of African descent,if you accept the out of Africa event then it's easy to explain humanity the issue is whether you're a contemporary or ancient African and whether the contemporary African have remain the same or change because of a reduction in genetic diversity and possibly population replacement throughout the ages.
I do not accept the OoA model fully. I lean more towards multiregional hypothesis.
Posts: 115 | From: NYC | Registered: Feb 2018
| IP: Logged |
posted
OK Dinkum, First Warning: The post removed offered nothing new or insightful to the discussion at this point. And was obviously made with the intent to antagonize other posters. Long story short, it's FLAMEBAIT.
Posts of this nature will no longer be tolerated in this section. Have a Good Day!
[ 11. February 2018, 11:44 PM: Message edited by: Elmaestro ]
Posts: 108 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2018
| IP: Logged |
posted
Unfortunately, it seems some people cannot accept reality. All my posts came with respected sources.
Why is it okay to put up tons of Sub-Saharan Africans and claim they are the supposedly real descendants of ancient Egyptians, WHEN DNA, HAIR ANALYSIS and FORENSIC SCIENCE RECREATIONS just debunked them?
Posts: 108 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2018
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dinkum: Unfortunately, it seems some people cannot accept reality. All my posts came with respected sources.
Why is it okay to put up tons of Sub-Saharan Africans and claim they are the supposedly real descendants of ancient Egyptians, WHEN DNA, HAIR ANALYSIS and FORENSIC SCIENCE RECREATIONS just debunked them?
you are hear to propagandize and confirm your biases.
When people point out errors or questionable things in your presentations you just ignore it. You dont want to discuss things just talk down to people, attempt to "put then in their place"
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dinkum: Unfortunately, it seems some people cannot accept reality. All my posts came with respected sources.
Why is it okay to put up tons of Sub-Saharan Africans and claim they are the supposedly real descendants of ancient Egyptians, WHEN DNA, HAIR ANALYSIS and FORENSIC SCIENCE RECREATIONS just debunked them?
The Upper Egyptians in Luxor, Esna, Kom Ombo, Edfu and Aswan are the true descendants of the ancient Egyptians; the rulers of the 11th dynasty were from Aswan. Like their ancestors, people from the aforementioned areas are mahogany-brown. These people are not "Sub-Saharan" and are most likely the best representatives of the Upper Egyptian predynastic cultures that established ancient Egypt.
The predynastic cultures of Upper Egypt are not transplants from the Levant - as you argue; they are derived from populations that have been in the Nile Valley for tens of thousands of years.
Late period DNA results from areas exposed to large-scale Levantine immigration are about as useful as using the DNA of modern Anglo-Australians to study ancient Australian biological affinities.
Until you produce early period results from Southern Egypt - you will not have anything of substance.
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
Something I find tricky with both of these reconstructions is that they often show these things in dark lighting giving us the momentary impression that they are darker. Then in other photos under well lit conditions they look lighter in the realm of Europeans, that actual color of the reconstruction --and not with the high yellow tone you sometimes see in North Africa.
Another problem, I said it earlier is that the eyes are depicted brown not black. I think black would be a better assumption
Also the fleshy parts of these people's face, nose and lips when they were alive is hard to predict from these mummies
And for Tutankhamen in particular all the Egyptian art has him medium brown not in the above color in the reconstruction
here 's the Today Show VIDEO everybody is talking about:
quote:Originally posted by Dinkum: Unfortunately, it seems some people cannot accept reality. All my posts came with respected sources.
Why is it okay to put up tons of Sub-Saharan Africans and claim they are the supposedly real descendants of ancient Egyptians, WHEN DNA, HAIR ANALYSIS and FORENSIC SCIENCE RECREATIONS just debunked them?
What hair analysis? Your DNA analysis sampled Egyptians that had been living under foreign rule for hundreds of years AND was Lower Egyptian which meant they'd be more mixed with Levanites than Southern the Egyptians that brought the dynastic period to Egypt. DNA Tribes, genetic data on Ramses and ancinent Sudanese data isn't "much" but it all points to a mostly African origin.
Other posters also showed you that Near Easterners could vary in appearance. Before the spread of light skin found in modern Europeans, the Socotra arabs, that have little African DNA, would've been more representative of the Near East. Yet appearances of these Arabs are generally in range for "blacks."
So only knowing the haplogroup, especially without an idea of when it arrived in Egypt, is insufficient to make broad enough assumptions about race. Knowing their subclade or haplogroup doesn't mean you know what they looked like which is more important because both often predate the spread of light skin, and the morphologies of southern Egyptian faces was often in range of blacks during the predynastic period when the state was emerging.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dinkum: This is a Y-DNA Map of Indigenous Peoples:
Sub Saharan Africans (including Sudanese) are NOT closely related to Mid East people. They carry Y-DNA A ans are more closely related to Khoisan:
This is a MTDNA Map of indigenous peoples of the world. It speaks for itself:
It’s funny, because physical anthropology says something else.
Besides that,
quote:
Colored dots indicate genetic diversity. Each new group outside of Africa represents a sampling of the genetic diversity present in its founder population. The ancestral population in Africa was sufficiently large to build up and retain substantial genetic diversity.
--Brenna M. Henna, L. L. Cavalli-Sforzaa,1, and Marcus W. Feldmanb,2 Edited by C. Owen Lovejoy, Kent State University, Kent, OH, and approved September 25, 2012 (received for review July 19, 2012)
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Some people wont accept the recreations of white Egyptians but are quite happy to accept Cheddar Man recreation. Whats the difference? Both were done with 3D imaging.
I also think the scientists doing the recreating of ancient Egyptians (which have all been Caucasians) know a lot more about their subject. King Tut is probably the most researched ancient mummy ever. Im also sure they know what Haplogroups he carried. They just havent been published yet. Hopefully the Amarna Dynasty results will come out soon. Whats the bet they're probably Middle Eastern in origin just like the majority of the other mummies.
Posts: 108 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2018
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dinkum: Some people wont accept the recreations of white Egyptians but are quite happy to accept Cheddar Man recreation. Whats the difference? Both were done with 3D imaging.
I also think the scientists doing the recreating of ancient Egyptians (which have all been Caucasians) know a lot more about their subject. King Tut is probably the most researched ancient mummy ever. Im also sure they know what Haplogroups he carried. They just havent been published yet. Hopefully the Amarna Dynasty results will come out soon. Whats the bet they're probably Middle Eastern in origin just like the majority of the other mummies.
Keep dreaming that Amenhotep III and Queen Tiye produced "Middle-Eastern" descendants. I look forward to the release of early dynasty Upper Egyptian DNA results. The "majority" of the mummies were from the North and were from the late period; a period in which Asiatics had already entrenched themselves demographically after they poured into Egypt en mass in the 11th dynasty and settled in the exact area where these mummies were sourced from.
Ancient Egypt started from the South and only results from the South will settle this.
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dinkum: Some people wont accept the recreations of white Egyptians but are quite happy to accept Cheddar Man recreation. Whats the difference? Both were done with 3D imaging.
It's because it looks nothing like how the Egyptians portrayed her, not even the busts.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
The real Nefriti, my my look at those lips .. lol
Limestone trial piece showing the head of Nefertiti. This drawing of the Queen, with the lips cut out, was found in the 1890s in Amarna. It shares the iconic features of the Berlin bust. Petrie Museum, London. (Photo: Osama Shukir Muhammed Amin FRCP(Glasg )
"the Younger Lady as Nefertiti"
Right profile view of the ‘Younger Lady’ mummy from KV35. Over the years, experts have proposed various names, ranging from Nefertiti to Sitamun, to identify this person. Wikimedia Commons.
"Given the age and poor state of preservation of the Younger Lady, the theories proposed pertaining to her are insufficient, circumstantial, and inconclusive. So not everyone is convinced cent percent that the mummy used to create this face is indeed Nefertiti. Some sections seem to want to state positively that DNA has “proven” the relationship between certain individuals of the Amarna period, but extracting DNA from Egyptian mummies has proven troublesome, and whether or not the results are truly as accurate as some wish to believe, is a debatable point. Over the last decade there have been many attempts with varying and ambiguous results."
What is your skin in the game? What is your ethnicity, North African? Jewish? Euro?
What is your political point of view? Right Wing? Left Wing? Nationalist? Zionist?
As a New World tri racial I don't subscribe to any centricism but I am adverse to Euro-centricism since it is used as a tool/mechanism for world economic domination and enslavement of indigenous populations and theft of their natural resources.
All science is biased or the interpretation of results is biased. All science or the study of it has confirmation bias see Schrodinger's cat
The question that I find fascinating is why Euro's & Asians run back to Africa during Glacial Maximums and Minimums? Climate change is normal. Where do humans survive during these changes? what is the most stable environment for humans on the planet?Maybe the place with the most human DNA diversity. Continental African diversity is a feature not a bug. Geology, geology, ancient geology is the key. 10k years ago during a glacial maximum there was was no "Arabia" there was only an African continuum from SW India to Eastern Africa.
The last Ice Age made much of the globe uninhabitable, but there were oases - or refugia - where people 20,000 years ago were able to cluster and survive
"The new discoveries about an Ice Age refugium in Arabia and the subsequent outward migration are based on a study of a rare mitochondrial DNA lineage named R0a, which, uniquely, is most frequent in Arabia and the Horn of Africa. Dr Gandini and her co-researchers have reached the conclusion that this lineage is more ancient than previously thought and that it has a deeper presence in Arabia than was earlier believed. This makes the case for at least one glacial refugium during the Pleistocene period, which spanned the Ice Age"
Why don't you ask the Chinese who are busy building roads in the interior of West Africa? Buying up huge tracks of land for farming in East Africa? The Indians are doing likewise.
Can there be a world power who dominates without the African continent and it's resources? Ask the ancient Egyptians who had normal trading with the interior which begins at Aswan/Elephantine. Ask the Alexander the Great? Ask the Romans? Ask the British Empire? Ask the Chinese who now Aspire to world domination.
What is not being counted or measured in the current DNA data is human extinction, or the politically correct word ghost population. Where is this extinction most located at?
"Africa has always been inhabited by Caucasians" so the DNA says...modern myth making is a prelude to re invasion/colonization/exploitation/destruction for planetary survival as climate change is normal, and most Euro countries become once again uninhabitable.
The reconstruction is just another form of mythmaking, white folk version of we wuz kangz..
See Tarzan King of the Jungle See Nattie Bumpo See Dances with wolves
-------------------- It's not my burden to disabuse the ignorant of their wrong opinions Posts: 2699 | From: New York | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged |
Ancient Egypt started from the South and only results from the South will settle this.
It's honestly doubtful that any genetic data from people that old would "settle" things. Not about race. Many Near Eastern subclades may predate the expansion of light skin found in modern Europeans. They would not only have to show these were arabs with skin tones contemporary with modern ("white") arabs, they'd have to show the morphology of the face was also in line. And what data we have does not support that. The southern Egyptians also did not speak Semetic. Which means again even if you did find "Eurasian" subclades, why wouldn't they speak Semetic? This would suggest against Eurasian back migrations recent enough for Sudanese migrants to produce a modern European phenotype. And no, showing genetic evidence that they happened to be lighter than a Dinka (like many northern Sudanese today) is not the same as showing evidence that they were as light as modern Europeans.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
There is something called DNA typing which can show what skin colour, eye colour and hair colour an ancient human had, Like the Cheddar Man recreation. DNA taken from the Abusir el Meleq mummies showed they had light skin, dark eyes and hair.
quote:Originally posted by Dinkum: Some people wont accept the recreations of white Egyptians but are quite happy to accept Cheddar Man recreation. Whats the difference? Both were done with 3D imaging.
It's because it looks nothing like how the Egyptians portrayed her, not even the busts.
Actually ancient Egyptian sculptures often portray the same person looking like a different person. If you look at the sculptures of Akhenaten on this Wiki site, they look like two different people. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AkhenatenPosts: 108 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2018
| IP: Logged |
posted
If they are able to extract DNA from mummies and determine skin tone, why are people still arguing over the accurateness of Nefertiti's head bust?
There is something called DNA typing which can show what skin colour, eye colour and hair colour an ancient human had, Like the Cheddar Man recreation. DNA taken from the Abusir el Meleq mummies showed they had light skin, dark eyes and hair.
quote:Originally posted by Frankly Kemet: we are dealing with a common or average look. You would have better footing to argue the two men look Dominican. They more than likely would be treated as Hispanics in the US.
The average look doesn't mean that people that deviate a bit from the average aren't black or aren't AA. Europeans are still trained to look at a man that looks like this:
And know he's black. "Hispanic" is also not a race. Not that it really matters though honestly. I didn't say all of North Africa looked black, and many people in Cairo especially a lot of Copts do not look black at all. Though as most people mention here, Egyptian culture came south to north, not north to south.
so lets try to bring this full circle, what are the physical markers Americans look for to identify someone as racially "Black"?
Ask the question in reverse and you will get your answer. What does it take to pass for white in America? There are many books, articles and stories on how mixed race people hid their African identity.. this is a good story from recently when a white woman found out her Grandfather was black
-------------------- It's not my burden to disabuse the ignorant of their wrong opinions Posts: 2699 | From: New York | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dinkum: Some people wont accept the recreations of white Egyptians but are quite happy to accept Cheddar Man recreation. Whats the difference? Both were done with 3D imaging.
I also think the scientists doing the recreating of ancient Egyptians (which have all been Caucasians) know a lot more about their subject. King Tut is probably the most researched ancient mummy ever. Im also sure they know what Haplogroups he carried. They just havent been published yet. Hopefully the Amarna Dynasty results will come out soon. Whats the bet they're probably Middle Eastern in origin just like the majority of the other mummies.
Keep dreaming that Amenhotep III and Queen Tiye produced "Middle-Eastern" descendants. I look forward to the release of early dynasty Upper Egyptian DNA results. The "majority" of the mummies were from the North and were from the late period; a period in which Asiatics had already entrenched themselves demographically after they poured into Egypt en mass in the 11th dynasty and settled in the exact area where these mummies were sourced from.
Ancient Egypt started from the South and only results from the South will settle this.
True, but as for Queen Tiyes parents they were natural blondes. Even Wiki states they were West Asian: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuya
posted
Why ask in the reverse when the question is what constitutes "black"?
quote:Originally posted by Yatunde Lisa:
quote:Originally posted by Frankly Kemet:
quote:Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:Originally posted by Frankly Kemet: we are dealing with a common or average look. You would have better footing to argue the two men look Dominican. They more than likely would be treated as Hispanics in the US.
The average look doesn't mean that people that deviate a bit from the average aren't black or aren't AA. Europeans are still trained to look at a man that looks like this:
And know he's black. "Hispanic" is also not a race. Not that it really matters though honestly. I didn't say all of North Africa looked black, and many people in Cairo especially a lot of Copts do not look black at all. Though as most people mention here, Egyptian culture came south to north, not north to south.
so lets try to bring this full circle, what are the physical markers Americans look for to identify someone as racially "Black"?
Ask the question in reverse and you will get your answer. What does it take to pass for white in America? There are many books, articles and stories on how mixed race people hid their African identity.. this is a good story from recently when a white woman found out her Grandfather was black
quote:Originally posted by Dinkum: Some people wont accept the recreations of white Egyptians but are quite happy to accept Cheddar Man recreation. Whats the difference? Both were done with 3D imaging.
I also think the scientists doing the recreating of ancient Egyptians (which have all been Caucasians) know a lot more about their subject. King Tut is probably the most researched ancient mummy ever. Im also sure they know what Haplogroups he carried. They just havent been published yet. Hopefully the Amarna Dynasty results will come out soon. Whats the bet they're probably Middle Eastern in origin just like the majority of the other mummies.
Keep dreaming that Amenhotep III and Queen Tiye produced "Middle-Eastern" descendants. I look forward to the release of early dynasty Upper Egyptian DNA results. The "majority" of the mummies were from the North and were from the late period; a period in which Asiatics had already entrenched themselves demographically after they poured into Egypt en mass in the 11th dynasty and settled in the exact area where these mummies were sourced from.
Ancient Egypt started from the South and only results from the South will settle this.
True, but as for Queen Tiyes parents they were natural blondes. Even Wiki states they were West Asian: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuya
DNA taken from ancient Egyptians is becoming very common. There has already been 4 different areas in Egypt where DNA has been taken from ancient mummies. Hopefully, the Amarna mummies will be next.
MTDNA R0a originated in the Mid East:
Its parent group MTDNA R is South Asia or South East Asian in origin.
Posts: 108 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2018
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dinkum: Yatunde Lisa: Im a atheist Jew.
DNA taken from ancient Egyptians is becoming very common. There has already been 4 different areas in Egypt where DNA has been taken from ancient mummies. Hopefully, the Amarna mummies will be next.
MTDNA R0a originated in the Mid East:
Its parent group MTDNA R is South Asia or South East Asian in origin.
ROA Originates in an African complex during the last Glacial maximum. Please read the article I linked above. There is no such thing as the "near east" a false designation made by the British. Of course you are Jewish, I could tell from the pattern of the topics you are posting in i.e. the IGBOs & Lembas are not Jews. That subject just does not interest your average WASP or trump voter.
The "Near East" is not the Caucus, Just as The USA is not Europe but is now mostly inhabited by Europeans you are way to emotional about the NA designation of DNA and Egyptians, your investment is in part I am sure informed by your own Zionism.
Reporting in the April issue of PLoS Genetics, the researchers found that modern day Jews can attribute about 3% to 5% of their ancestry to sub-Saharan Africans, and that the exchange of genes between Jews and sub-Saharan Africans occurred approximately 72 generations, or about 2,000 years, ago. Read more: https://forward.com/culture/140721/genes-tell-tale-of-jewish-ties-to-africa/
Well, damn how did that get there?
Are you one of those atheist Jews who are still a Zionist based on a book of mythology and a made up designation by Colonial powers?
This is one of the reasons I don't buy into the current DNA game, Israel has too much money and pull to let that strip of land slip out of there hands, Egypt has to be Mid Eastern originated for to continue to justify it's continued occupation of NE Africa
See Paabo & Reich
You never know your 5% YRI just might be your ticket to stay... lol
-------------------- It's not my burden to disabuse the ignorant of their wrong opinions Posts: 2699 | From: New York | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged |
posted
LOL I dont care if Jews have Sub-Saharan DNA.
I wish that Palestinians and Jews could peacefully co-exist. I write to a lot of Egyptians. They dont see themselves as Middle Eastern and Copts especially, do not see themselves as anything but the ancient Egyptians.
Posts: 108 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2018
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dinkum: LOL I dont care if Jews have Sub-Saharan DNA.
I wish that Palestinians and Jews could peacefully co-exist. I write to a lot of Egyptians. They dont see themselves as Middle Eastern and Copts especially, do not see themselves as anything but the ancient Egyptians.
The Copts are free to see themselves however they so wish but they are definitely far less pristine than the Southern Egyptians in the areas I mentioned.
The mahogany-brown Egyptians are direct descendants of the predynastic Upper Egyptian cultures that established ancient Egypt whereas the Copts are likely derived from an initially African population swamped by gradual (and occassionally) large-scale immigration from the Levant.
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:There is something called DNA typing which can show what skin colour, eye colour and hair colour an ancient human had, Like the Cheddar Man recreation. DNA taken from the Abusir el Meleq mummies showed they had light skin, dark eyes and hair.
You continue to post statements but don't respond to anybody who responds. It's just the same stuff ad nauseum:
quote:Originally posted by capra:
there is not enough coverage in the ancient samples or at this point even enough understanding of genetics of pigmentation for good prediction of skin colouring. the best coverage sample is JK2911, who is from the Late Period.
his genotype (per genetiker) is rs1426654-A (probably AA) in SLC24A5, rs16891982-CC in SLC45A2, and rs1042602-GG in TYR.
now rs1426654-A (light skin allele) is very common, most MENA people and virtually all Europeans have AA. Pakistanis have like 75% AA, North Indians 50% AA. even Ethiopians, Somalis, and South Indians have ~50-60% allele frequency, so ~30% AA (assuming Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium which we shouldn't really).
rs16891982-G (light skin allele) is less common outside of Europe but it is still pretty frequent in MENA. in Egypt varies from 14% in Aswan to 65% in Alexandria. mostly 50-60% in North Africa. it is only ~15% in North India, 6% in Bangladesh, and almost zero in the Horn. so CC which JK2911 has (homozygous for dark skin allele) would be found in most South Egyptians, South Asians, Horners, etc, but only 10-35% of North Africans.
rs1402602-A (light skin allele) has a somewhat different distribution, it has around 25-40% frequency in northern and middle Europe but reaches ~55% in Tuscans and Sardinians. it reaches almost 50% in Mozabite Berbers from Algeria and Druze from the Levant, ~30% in Arab populations from Israel. (i don't have data for the Horn or most of MENA. also sample sizes are rather small so don't take these AFs as precise.) also surprisingly common in Pakistan where it is about 25% in Sindhis, 30% in Pathans, and 50% in Kalash. so again JK2911 has GG (homozygous for dark skin allele) which only a minority of Mozabites and about half of Pakistanis and Israeli Arabs would have. no idea about Egypt.
now as far as these 3 genes go over 90% of Mozabites would be lighter-skinned than JK2911, as would most modern Delta Egyptians and Levantine Arabs. 30% of Horners would be as light. average Southern Egyptians or Pakistanis would be closest.
however even these three rather large-effect variants account for only a minority of the variation in human skin colour, so really could be anything from fairly dark brown to light olive.
but you could always look at paintings and mummy skin lol
Dark skin was still around in the Europe until 5kya. In the Near East we also know dark skin was still around 6kya because Socotra arabs who entered the island at that time retained their dark skin. Proto Semetic is before this time period and Semetic would've been emerging at around the same time give or take a few centuries. Proto Indo European would've also been around thousands of years before. The Ancient Egyptians spoke neither Indo-European, nor Semetic. Please understand that I'm not asking when people started becoming lighter than a Dinka and developed complexions you can find in northern Sudan. I'm talking about modern European skin tones.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Like I said before, there was a migration of African slaves into Socotra. What ancient Socotra looked like and modern Socotra look like is two different things. Or are you trying to say that the original peoples of Socotra for some strange reason didnt interbreed with the escaped slaves? This has happened throughout the Arabian Peninsula. Yemeni people carry up to 35% African MTDNA. Saudi Arabia has 40% Black and Indian MTDNA:
This also applies to Egypt and North Africa who have a large percentage of Black African MTDNA from slavery. This does not apply to the Copts who had no slaves.
Posts: 108 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2018
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Arabian Peninsula is very mixed because of massive migrations since the discovery of oil and slavery from Sub Saharan Africa.
The way the ancient peoples of the Middle East looked, are the Christians peoples and other ethnic groups who by and large keep to themselves and therefore are the least mixed peoples in the Mid East.
These are the descendants of the ancient peoples of Mesopotamia:
quote:Originally posted by Dinkum: Like I said before, there was a migration of African slaves into Socotra. What ancient Socotra looked like and modern Socotra look like is two different things. Or are you trying to say that the original peoples of Socotra for some strange reason didnt interbreed with the escaped slaves?
This has already been debunked since last page:
quote:We collected samples throughout the island and analyzed mitochondrial DNA and Y-chromosomal variation. We found little African influence among the indigenous people of the island. Although the island population likely experienced founder effects, links to the Arabian Peninsula or southwestern Asia can still be found. In comparison with datasets from neighboring regions, the Soqotri population shows evidence of long-term isolation and autochthonous evolution of several mitochondrial haplogroups. Specifically, we identified two high-frequency founder lineages that have not been detected in any other populations and classified them as a new R0a1a1 subclade. Recent expansion of the novel lineages is consistent with a Holocene settlement of the island approximately 6 kya.
quote:Originally posted by Frankly Kemet: Two part question: (1) In the United States, is a dark skin with curly hair North African treated the same as an African American? (2) Is there a color, hair texture and facial phenotype hierarchy in the US?
1. It depends. They could look just like an African American but if they were from Egypt they were considered white. This was part of claiming Egypt. Some states considered Berbers black regardless of phenotype. Not to say a pale Berber couldn't pass.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic