Topic: The genetic history of the Southern Arc: , Natufians etc, Lazaridis 2022
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
Yeah keep calling me names like a preschooler it makes you look so smart and tough.
Keep flip-fopping your arguments too while you're at it.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Oh and the ONLY geneticist he's able to cite is Dr. Elhaik whose claims are questioned by other geneticists. Citing ONE questionable guy and nobody else calls things into question. And the way he talks I call Taz's sanity into question.
Plenty of geneticists are questioned, that means nothing. The fact that you even feel the need to mention that is sad.
At first you didn't even believe I contacted him and you were worried that I misrepresented your position when explaining it to him. Now you're trying to discredit him. Pathetic
Can you cite a geneticist who posits Abraham was likely a J carrier?
Posts: 2628 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
@the lioness
No he is not saying 2 different things. The part you quoted is specifically in regards to what I asked him about Abraham being hg J.
He confirmed what he wrote about E being the correct marker in the first email that you keep failing to post.
Posts: 2628 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
No he is not saying 2 different things. The part you quoted is specifically in regards to what I asked him about Abraham being hg J.
He confirmed what he wrote about E being the correct marker in the first email that you keep failing to post.
No, in his message to you he did not dismiss the idea that Abraham could be J
He said "There will never be an answer to that."
That means the possibility is not dismissed It remains an open question
If he was consistent about what he said elsewhere he would have said Abraham was not J, he was E which he said on a commercial website not a in science journal
What he told you was right. There is no body therefore nothing is certain as regards his DNA (if he existed)
Posts: 43016 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tazarah: At first you didn't even believe I contacted him and you were worried that I misrepresented your position when explaining it to him. Now you're trying to discredit him. Pathetic
That's because you're a freaking liar. And no I'm not discrediting him. Unlike you, I've read his work and while he accurate in some things he is off in other things hence why other geneticists question him.
quote:Can you cite a geneticist who posits Abraham was likely a J carrier?
Most geneticists don't deal in Biblical or any other legendary stuff. However they do deal with historical populations. Both Lioness and I have cited MULTIPLE geneticists and their papers showing that there was indeed an immigration of J carriers into the Levant from northern Mesopotamia. NONE of them say anything about Abraham but they ALL conclude that such a migration occurs with the time period that the patriarch Abraham came to Canaan. So GTFOH with your lies!
Posts: 26381 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
@the lioness,
Um, he said the idea that Abraham was J for XYZ reason(s) was "purely hypothetical", and he said that literally right after explaining how/why he came the conclusion that Natufians (E) were the most likely Israelite progenitors.
Couple all that with the fact that he writes Abraham is E on the ancient origins website.... it's beyond clear he rejects the idea that Abraham was J.
Posts: 2628 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
Now to Lioness and everyone else in this forum with rationality and common sense here are the archaeological and historical civilizations/cultures for context.
Neolithic cultures of northern Mesopotamia: Halafian Culture (c. 6500 B.C. – c. 5500 B.C.), the Samarra Culture (c. 5500 B.C. - c. 4800 B.C.), and the Hassuna Culture (c. 5750 B.C. – c. 5350 B.C.)
Bronze Age Cultures of North Mesopotamia
Iron Age Cultures of North Mesopotamia Posts: 26381 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
@djehuti
Yeah I totally lied about contacting Dr. Elhaik. Dr. Elhaik must be a liar too since he takes almost the exact same position I do on the matter.
Dr. Djehuti of egyptsearch is above all.
So in other words, you can't cite a geneticist who posits that Abraham was J, and you are basically drawing your own conclusions even though all the other evidence says otherwise about hg J? Lol...
Posts: 2628 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
The only thing I'm actually dumb for is: continuing to entertain your guys' comments directed toward me. I'm the only one who gets threatened when the mods come around so I literally have nothing to gain from this.
Posts: 2628 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tazarah: [QB] @the lioness,
Um, he said the idea that Abraham was J for XYZ reason(s) was "purely hypothetical", and he said that literally right after explaining how/why he came the conclusion that Natufians (E) were the most likely Israelite progenitors.
He did not say Abraham was E in his letter to you (assuming authentic) if he said Abraham was E he would not have said "This is a purely hypothetical question. There will never be an answer to that."
> Because to say Abraham was E is not hypothetical it's determinative that he was not J is another determinative statement That would have been a non-hypothetical answer to you
But instead what he said to you was "There will never be an answer to that."
You contacting Elhaik backfired
Posts: 43016 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Yeah I totally lied about contacting Dr. Elhaik. Dr. Elhaik must be a liar too since he takes almost the exact same position I do on the matter.
Dr. Djehuti of egyptsearch is above all.
So in other words, you can't cite a geneticist who posits that Abraham was J, and you are basically drawing your own conclusions even though all the other evidence says otherwise about hg J? Lol...
I didn't trust a word you say about Dr. Elhaik because your ass lied about virtually everything else! Another example of your habitchual lying-- what geneticist posits anything about any legendary figure like Abraham??!! Geneticists don't study legendary people from history unless they have the remains of that person, they study populations as a whole OR historical persons who have been verified. So NO geneticists say anything about Jesus let alone Abraham so your ass is lying again!
quote: The only thing I'm actually dumb for is: continuing to entertain your guys' comments directed toward me. I'm the only one who gets threatened when the mods come around so I literally have nothing to gain from this.
That's because you are lying obnoxious troll who should have been banned long time ago! All you do is lie and then demand for evidence which is then given but you ignore it and demand evidence again! Apparently you don't realize how crazy you appear. Are you accessing this forum in a mental hospital??
Posts: 26381 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
Reposting for "the lioness", who can't read. You took a day off from being an annoying troll but it looks like you're trying to start back up again.
Dr. Elhaik was only talking about Abraham having J when he said "hypothetical". That email was specifically about hg J. Anyone can read it and see that.
You are lying in real time, Dr. Elhaik wrote that Abraham had to have been E1b1 on the DNA origins website.
quote:Originally posted by Tazarah: @the lioness
No he is not saying 2 different things. The part you quoted is specifically in regards to what I asked him about Abraham being hg J.
He confirmed what he wrote about E being the correct marker in the first email that you keep failing to post.
Posts: 2628 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
@Dhejuti
Dr. Elhaik explained how he came to his conclusion(s) in the first email between him and I.
You, being a simple layperson on egyptsearch, probably have a hard time understanding.
If I'm a liar then I guess Dr. Elhaik is a liar too... crazy how that works huh?
Dr. Djehuti
Thank you for reminding us that you are not a geneticist, especially since you have been claiming Abraham is J for weeks on end. But at the same time you say geneticists shouldn't do that. Only Dr. Djehuti can do it huh
Posts: 2628 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Here we go again with your lies. I never claimed Abraham to have any lineage, because we don't have his remains you lying a**hole! I merely make an inference based on ALL the genetic findings. Bronze Age populations who immigrated into the Levant from northern Mesopotamia were males who were predominantly J carriers. Abraham came from north Mesopotamia and he and his family-- the Hebews-- migrated into the Levant. That is why I said it is likely Abraham (assuming he existed) carried J. I never said for certain he carried J, you dummy, because we don't even have proof outside of the bible that he existed!!
So how can I trust anything else you say?? I don't care if you contacted Dr. Iosif Lazaridis, I won't believe it unless I get evidence myself because you are proven to be a liar. You lied about the Bible, you lied about genetics, what is left??
Posts: 26381 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
Djehuti, with all due respect -- shutup. You don't know the Bible, you flip-flop on what "semitic" means and you have been spam posting your "cohen gene" BS everyday and night.
Everybody knows what you're trying to say about hg J, I can't believe you're still crying about all of this. Are you seriously mad?
Would you be willing to move this discussion from this internet forum and have a Biblical debate on a live platform?
Posts: 2628 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
Even if Y-DNA J did spread into Mesopotamia via the Hurrians, does that necessarily preclude the Hebrews' West Semitic forerunners having inherited it through admixture with them? Taz appears insistent that Abraham, as the foundational Israelite, had to have been Y-DNA E like the Natufians, but without skeletal remains we can confidently identify as his, that's hard to verify. We don't even know for sure if the biblical Abraham was a real individual as opposed to a mythical one like Heracles or Quetzalcoatl.
quote:Originally posted by Tazarah: Djehuti, with all due respect -- shutup. You don't know the Bible, you flip-flop on what "semitic" means and you have been spam posting your "cohen gene" BS everyday and night.
Everybody knows what you're trying to say about hg J, I can't believe you're still crying about all of this. Are you seriously mad?
Would you be willing to move this discussion from this internet forum and have a Biblical debate on a live platform?
I know you can't help yourself. Your mental illness, or demonic possession, or both won't allow you to quit with your lies. First I know the bible far more than you since I debunked your ridiculous misinterpretations and claims in past threads. You don't even know the original Hebrew text and and you even incorrectly define Greek words or suffixes like 'ite'. Second, I never flip-flopped on Semitic. It is a language group pure and simple NOT a lineage or ethnicity. Third as far as what I'm saying about haplogroup J, all I did was cite what geneticists have found in MULTIPLE papers written by DOZENS of geneticists not just one guy like Dr. Elhaik so please spare me your b*tching and whining. Lastly, I exposed your ignorance on the bible before so you have no chance debating me. I've debated people with significantly more knowledge of scripture than YOU no.
You are a little punk who needs either therapy or a good slapping.
Posts: 26381 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP: Even if Y-DNA J did spread into Mesopotamia via the Hurrians, does that necessarily preclude the Hebrews' West Semitic forerunners having inherited it through admixture with them? Taz appears insistent that Abraham, as the foundational Israelite, had to have been Y-DNA E like the Natufians, but without skeletal remains we can confidently identify as his, that's hard to verify. We don't even know for sure if the biblical Abraham was a real individual as opposed to a mythical one like Heracles or Quetzalcoatl.
Same exact thing can be said for hg J and what Djehuti is insisting. Isn't it crazy how Taz is the only one who gets told things like this, even when Djehuti is making the same exact argument for a different Y marker?
Hmm..... wonder why that is
Posts: 2628 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ I know you can't help yourself. Your mental illness, or demonic possession, or both won't allow you to quit with your lies. First I know the bible far more than you since I debunked your ridiculous misinterpretations and claims in past threads. You don't even know the original Hebrew text and and you even incorrectly define Greek words or suffixes like 'ite'. Second, I never flip-flopped on Semitic. It is a language group pure and simple NOT a lineage or ethnicity. Third as far as what I'm saying about haplogroup J, all I did was cite what geneticists have found in MULTIPLE papers written by DOZENS of geneticists not just one guy like Dr. Elhaik so please spare me your b*tching and whining.
You are a little punk who needs either therapy or a good slapping.
You willing to debate on a live platform?
One of us is definitely demon possessed, look at the way you're typing compared to the way I'm typing.
Rofl...
Posts: 2628 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ I already debunked your ignorant lying ass. So what's the point? I've debated people far more knowledgeable than you and won so you don't stand a chance. What you mean by "live platform" is this forum not enough?
quote:Originally posted by Tazarah: Same exact thing can be said for hg J and what Djehuti is insisting. Isn't it crazy how Taz is the only one who gets told things like this, even when Djehuti is making the same exact argument for a different Y marker?
Hmm..... wonder why that is
Uh the only difference is that we have actual EVIDENCE while you do NOT!
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26381 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
I'm talking about a live Biblical debate on an platform in front of actual viewers, not talking back and forth on egyptsearch where everyone is on your side. If you think you're too good for me I'll set it up with a leader in my "cult".
And you say "we have actual evidence" ... evidence of what? Both you, "lioness" and brandon all just admit we don't have Abraham's bones. So that means everything (including my position) is speculation. So you either have evidence or you don't. Which is it?
Posts: 2628 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
Speaking of Abraham, didn't he father Ishmael through an Egyptian concubine named Hagar? Ishmael is claimed to be the ancestor of Arabic-speakers. I don't necessarily think the story is literally true, but might it nonetheless attest to the Hebrews perceiving early Arabic-speakers to have some connection to both their own culture and that of the Egyptians (and maybe other Africans)?
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP: Even if Y-DNA J did spread into Mesopotamia via the Hurrians, does that necessarily preclude the Hebrews' West Semitic forerunners having inherited it through admixture with them? Taz appears insistent that Abraham, as the foundational Israelite, had to have been Y-DNA E like the Natufians, but without skeletal remains we can confidently identify as his, that's hard to verify. We don't even know for sure if the biblical Abraham was a real individual as opposed to a mythical one like Heracles or Quetzalcoatl.
The problem with the Tazmanian devil is that both Lioness and I cited 4 or 5 papers showing DNA tests done in remains from north Mesopotamia whose lineages are predominantly J. The remains are identified with Neolithic to Chalcolithic and Bronzd Age times. Many of these predate Kura-Araxes and have NOTHING to do with that culture. This is why the Tazmanian devil is intellectually bankrupt.
Posts: 26381 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tazarah: Reposting for "the lioness", who can't read. You took a day off from being an annoying troll but it looks like you're trying to start back up again.
Dr. Elhaik was only talking about Abraham having J when he said "hypothetical". That email was specifically about hg J. Anyone can read it and see that.
You are lying in real time, Dr. Elhaik wrote that Abraham had to have been E1b1 on the DNA origins website.
quote:Originally posted by Tazarah: @the lioness
No he is not saying 2 different things. The part you quoted is specifically in regards to what I asked him about Abraham being hg J.
He confirmed what he wrote about E being the correct marker in the first email that you keep failing to post.
quote:Originally posted by Tazarah:
to Eran▾ 12:15 PM (5 hours ago) Thank you for your response Dr. Elhaik. I have one last question: What would you say is the best response to those who claim Abraham must have been haplogroup J due to the fact that haplogroup J supposedly came from Mesopotamia to the Levant at the same time period Abraham did?
Eran Elhaik to me▾ This is a purely hypothetical question. There will never be an answer to that. 4:04 PM (1 hour ago) ☆
He did not say " that hypothesis (theory) is wrong, Abraham was E" Instead he said "there will never be an answer to that" whether or not Abraham was J
And it is unlikely that an “Israelite gene” ever existed since Iron Age Israelite tribes exchanged genes with their neighboring tribes. Had there been a paternal “Israelite gene” on the Y chromosome, it would have been lost due to the transition to matrilineal descent. Had there been a maternal “Israelite gene” on the mitochondrial chromosome, it would have been lost due to the initial period of partilineal descent. Had there been an autosomal “Israelite gene,” it would have been lost due to the high rates of movements into the religion. Had there been an autosomal “Israelite gene,” it would not be unique to Jews due to the high rates of movements out of the religion. Had there been an autosomal “Israelite gene” that survived to modern days, it would have been extremely rare and undetectable by popular search approaches that prioritize findings common to a large fraction of Jews.
Posts: 43016 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP: The problem with the Tazmanian devil is that both Lioness and I cited 4 or 5 papers showing DNA tests done in remains from north Mesopotamia whose lineages are predominantly J followed by G. The remains are identified with Neolithic to Chalcolithic and Bronzd Age times. Many of these predate Kura-Araxes and have NOTHING to do with that culture. This is why the Tazmanian devil is intellectually bankrupt.
So Abraham and the Hebrews were J (which links back to the caucusus), yet Noah and his family were originally from Mesopotamia.
Got it.
And I already demonstrated that all the cultures "lioness" listed in this thread existed during the same timeframe as the Kura-Araxes (4000 to 2000 BCE).
Posts: 2628 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ So I am right again. He totally misrepresented his correspondence with Dr. Elhaik. Oh I'm so shocked! Posts: 26381 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
^ Here you go desperado.
I didn't need to ask him if he thought Abraham was E because on the website he pointed me to in the email, he literally says Abraham was E1b1.
quote:...and other people may find that they are close to Abraham, a Turkish man (E1b1) who led a group of Anatolians to what he must to have felt was the promised land.
This is beyond pathetic at this point. This is the same thing you do with your "research" -- jump to false conclusions without all the context.
Posts: 2628 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
This entire thread is a flaming heap of garbage at this point.
It's only a matter of time before Elmaestro comes to declare victory for all of the laypeople and threaten to ban me.
Posts: 2628 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: Noah isn't in the archeological record and scripture never stated that he was born in Mesopotamia, but we know for certain that he moved there from Ararat.
What I recall is that Mt. Ararat was what his ark was said to land on after the flood, not necessarily where he himself was from. That said, scholars have noted a similarity between the Noah’s ark myth and a flood story mentioned in the Mesopotamian Epic of Gilgamesh, so a Mesopotamian connection certainly is plausible. Mesopotamia was after all prone to devastating floods.
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
^ That is exactly my point Brandon. Noah's hg would reflect where he was from originally. Not where the ark landed. That doesn't make sense. Ararat is in the caucusus but the Bible clearly describes a Mesopotamian setting for the story of Noah.
As for the archaeological record, we can't toss out and disregard the Bible when it suits us.
Posts: 2628 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ If it weren't for all the relevant data that was posted in this thread, it would have been reduced to flaming garbage because of YOU!!
quote:Originally posted by Tazarah: ^ Here you go desperado.
I didn't need to ask him if he thought Abraham was E because on the website he pointed me to in the email, he literally says Abraham was E1b1.
quote:...and other people may find that they are close to Abraham, a Turkish man (E1b1) who led a group of Anatolians to what he must to have felt was the promised land.
This is beyond pathetic at this point. This is the same thing you do with your "research" -- jump to false conclusions without all the context.
The problem with the above claim comes from several papers includint the 2018 Lazaridis & Reich et ales. paper which stated:
Previous genome-wide ancient DNA studies from the Near East have revealed that at the time when agriculture developed, populations from Anatolia, Iran, and the Levant were approximately as genetically differentiated from each other as present-day Europeans and East Asians are today
So how can a Turkish (Anatolian) man carry an African lineage unless he has African ancestors from where??
Posts: 26381 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
^ Is this the part where you contact Dr. Elhaik and get his explanation (like how I did)? Or are you just going to play scholar on here and claim victory? If you genuinely wanted an answer then you would contact him and get an answer from him.
He responds promptly.
If you don't do that then it becomes clear that your only goal is to preach to the choir.
I'm sure every normal person outside of egyptsearch would lean toward the actual geneticist in this case.
P.S. ----- him writing that Abraham was E1b1 on that website proves that I did not misrepresent the correspondence, and that you and "lioness" are the actual liars with zero integrity.
Posts: 2628 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
Djehuti, why go back and forth with me?
Draft a prompt but detailed email in which you ask Dr. Elhaik to explain XYZ about XYZ, and ask him to reference papers.
You say Tazarah is this, Tazarah is that. But I'm literally offering you the opportunity to debate people "higher up" than myself (about the Bible) and also the opportunity to discuss this hg J thing with an actual geneticist who has decades of experience doing the EXACT THING that we have been debating for the past weeks.
I mean, I did it. I reached out to him. What are you afraid of? That he will shed light on things that you are wrong about?
He is a literal professor at a literal university with a literal Ph.D, they deal with things like this all the time.
Posts: 2628 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
@ DJ, Elmaestro, and anyone else who isn't the Tazmanian Dunce
I do have one question about the Hebrews having roots in upper Mesopotamia, though. Wasn't Joseph, the son of Jacob, said to be from Canaan prior to his move to Egypt? That's what I remember from the musical about him and the technicolor coat as well as the Dreamworks direct-to-DVD sequel at least. Would that not imply that the Hebrews' ancestors had already moved into the Levant before the events of Exodus, despite the time after Exodus being when they conquered the Canaanites that were already there?
Also, is it possible that some of the apparent Mesopotamian influences on Hebrew culture might have developed as a result of Babylonian captivity in the sixth century BC?
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
Brandon, you are a dunce. The fact that even in recent threads, you assert that my position is to claim Israel was all black, demonstrates how completely lost and clueless you are about what I believe. Yet you continue to insert yourself into discussions where I am involved. Just have a seat already. Go draw more black ancient Israelites so that you can complain about black people who claim Israelites were black. You are a walking, talking contradiction.
The crazy part about all of this is I'm the only one in here who actually believes Abraham was a real person.
That alone speaks volumes. None of you even believe in the Bible -- only when you want to make it fit your narrative.
Nobody expect a response from me unless:
A) You are going to contact Dr. Elhaik and ask him for an explanation(s)
B) You are willing to debate a Biblical topic in front of a live audience on YouTube
Anything else would be nonsensical at this point. We've all said everything we have to say and this is beyond fruitless.
I doubt either A or B will happen.
P.S., none of the information referenced in here shows hg J predating the Kura-Araxes culture (4000 to 2000 BC) in Mesopotamia as djehuti has repeatedly claimed. Call me a "troll", "liar", whatever you want, but these are the facts. Posts: 2628 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
Um, he (Elhaik) said the idea that Abraham was J for XYZ reason(s) was "purely hypothetical", and he said that literally right after explaining how/why he came the conclusion that Natufians (E) were the most likely Israelite progenitors.
Couple all that with the fact that he writes Abraham is E on the ancient origins website.... it's beyond clear he rejects the idea that Abraham was J. [/qb]
.
.
quote:Originally posted by Tazarah: ^ Here you go desperado.
I didn't need to ask him (Elhaik) if he thought Abraham was E because on the website he pointed me to in the email, he literally says Abraham was E1b1.
quote:...and other people may find that they are close to Abraham, a Turkish man (E1b1) who led a group of Anatolians to what he must to have felt was the promised land.
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP: @ DJ, Elmaestro, and anyone else who isn't the Tazmanian Dunce
I do have one question about the Hebrews having roots in upper Mesopotamia, though. Wasn't Joseph, the son of Jacob, said to be from Canaan prior to his move to Egypt? That's what I remember from the musical about him and the technicolor coat as well as the Dreamworks direct-to-DVD sequel at least. Would that not imply that the Hebrews' ancestors had already moved into the Levant before the events of Exodus, despite the time after Exodus being when they conquered the Canaanites that were already there?
Yes. The story of the northern Hebrews is one of migration and settlement. They were agricultural but also capable of being seminomadic. There are historical causes as well as religious/spiritual causes. So for example, Abraham and some of his family split left their homeland in Arphakhshad (Aram-Padan) to migrate south into Canaan. This story very well may reflect an actual migration event. The Biblical reasons is that God called Abraham to settle Canaan and that God picked that land to be a holy land for his chosen holy people. After Jacob and his wives established the 12 tribes, then came a widespread famine that affected many lands and nations which was said to last for 7 years. Again the famine was very well a historical event though the bible never said the cause was due to God's anger or wrath. As it so happened Joseph who sold as a slave to Egypt by his brothers became an official there due to Joseph being a skill oneiromancer (dream diviner) in which he correctly interpreted pharaoh's dream to be a prophecy that there will be a 7 year famine following the 7 years of plenty so to prepare they had to store as much grain as possible. When the famine happened, many peoples from Canaan sought refuge in Egypt. But of course after 430 years in Egypt, they returned to their homeland. While there is some evidence for the 7 year famine like the Old Kingdom famine stela and some other things. After the Israelites left Egypt (along with other peoples) because the spies were too scared to take the land showing their lack of faith, Israel was forced into exile of wandering in the wilderness for 40 years. After which they were allowed to enter Canaan. The lack of evidence for the conquest of Canaan leads many skeptics think it never happened. What's interesting is the Greeks have a similar legend about their patriarch Hellen (ancestor of the Hellenes/Greeks) conquering the peninsula that originally belonged to the Pelasgoi. What's clear is that by the Iron Age there was a kingdom of Israel formed from the earlier tribal confederation which then split into two kingdoms with the northern kingdom sacked by Assyria and its citizens deported while the southern kingdom of Judea was sacked and its citizens deported to Babylon which was known as the 2nd exile for 70 years until Babylon was conquered by Persia and the Emperor Cyrus allowed them to return. The civil war which lead to the splitting of the kingdom and the sacking of each kingdom being the result of disloyalty to God, though there is historical evidence supporting these events.
quote:Also, is it possible that some of the apparent Mesopotamian influences on Hebrew culture might have developed as a result of Babylonian captivity in the sixth century BC?
Definitely! The Hebrew Calendar IS the Babylonian Calendar and some holidays follow those of Babylonia like Rosh Hashanah, and even the minor holidays of Purim and Khanukkah. Many people don't realize that even shabbat (sabbath) which wasn't originally every Saturday of the Roman calendar but rather every 7th day after the New Moon (first day of the month) and even the day of the New Moon itself Rosh Khodesh also called 'Women's Day of Rest' were ALL shared by the Babylonians!! This is why many skeptics who are of course atheists, dismiss Israelite religion as simply Babylonian although Jews and Christians believe that there was one original true religion which became diluted or corrupted.
By the way, I'm sure there were influence from Egypt due to the Israelites stay in that country.
Posts: 26381 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: By the way, I'm sure there were influence from Egypt due to the Israelites stay in that country.
To the best of my knowledge, corroborating evidence for the events of the Book of Exodus in Egyptian records is lacking. I'm open to there being a grain of truth in it though. There could have been some immigrating Hebrews among the Hyksos's subjects in Lower Egypt during the Second Intermediate Period, as well as New Kingdom Egyptians taking Hebrew captives during their campaigns in the Levant. We know the Merneptah stelae from c. 1208 BC mentions early Israel as a nation the Egyptians laid to waste, which would suggest that the Israelites were already an established power in the region during New Kingdom times.
There are a lot more Turkish samples but these are the oldest, this goes back to about 9,000 BC
So we have Hgs:
C1
G2
I2
H2c
J2 _________________________
note H2c is also Y-DNA, not the familiar MtDNA H
The J2 comes in 3636-3377 BC
So if Abraham was born circa 1800 BC and if we assume he was Turkish he's in a region that includes J2 and the rest of these above haplogroups several hundreds of years before he's born So there is no reason he, if he existed, could not be any one of these haplogroups
and in terms Abraham migrating to Israel with Lot this is a tiny group not even a tribe so it would not be notable for spreading J like a mass migration which already occurred. And if it did happen there is no way of proving it on a scientific level. There is nothing that says if Kura-Araxes spread J (hypothetical) that there were not other people from the region who spread it on a smaller case non-notable case such as, hypothetically Abraham or small groups of people moving around Nothing stopping further J spread
Later on the chart there is a case of E1b1b2 (E-M34) 3093-2920 BC and later a couple of other Es so E is included and Abraham could also have been E
Hair and skin type included here
Posts: 43016 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Actually that is a common misconception that Abraham left with only his family or a small tribe. His father Terah was a patriarch of ruling head of their respective tribe while his eldest brother Nahor was heir to their tribal territory. Abraham who was not heir left to found his own territory and he did with not only his own immediate family but a faction of the tribe including his nephew Lot son of his other brother Haran which suggests Lot was not heir to his father's territory either.
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: By the way, I'm sure there were influence from Egypt due to the Israelites stay in that country.
To the best of my knowledge, corroborating evidence for the events of the Book of Exodus in Egyptian records is lacking. I'm open to there being a grain of truth in it though. There could have been some immigrating Hebrews among the Hyksos's subjects in Lower Egypt during the Second Intermediate Period, as well as New Kingdom Egyptians taking Hebrew captives during their campaigns in the Levant. We know the Merneptah stelae from c. 1208 BC mentions early Israel as a nation the Egyptians laid to waste, which would suggest that the Israelites were already an established power in the region during New Kingdom times.
You are correct. There is no historical evidence for the Exodus yet discovered. There were many movements back and forth between the Levant and Egypt and interestingly Egyptian texts called many of these Asiatic migrants terms suggesting 'servants' or 'laborers' but not necessarily slaves.
And we do know that by Iron Age times the Israelite kingdom culture does show a lot of Egyptian influence in architecture including temple and in the poetry.
Posts: 26381 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: [QB] ^ Actually that is a common misconception that Abraham left with only his family or a small tribe. His father Terah was a patriarch of ruling head of their respective tribe while his eldest brother Nahor was heir to their tribal territory. Abraham who was not heir left to found his own territory and he did with not only his own immediate family but a faction of the tribe including his nephew Lot son of his other brother Haran which suggests Lot was not heir to his father's territory either.
Genesis 12:4–5
4 So Abram departed, as the Lord had spoken unto him; and Lot went with him: and Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran. 5 And Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother’s son, and all their substance that they had gathered, and the souls that they had gotten in Haran; and they went forth to go into the land of Canaan; and into the land of Canaan they came.
_____________________________
This accounts for 2 males, Abraham and Lot and his wife Sarai.
Since we have no other source than the bible you would have to have a verse saying he came with part of a tribe
Posts: 43016 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP: @ DJ, Elmaestro, and anyone else who isn't the Tazmanian Dunce
I do have one question about the Hebrews having roots in upper Mesopotamia, though. Wasn't Joseph, the son of Jacob, said to be from Canaan prior to his move to Egypt? That's what I remember from the musical about him and the technicolor coat as well as the Dreamworks direct-to-DVD sequel at least. Would that not imply that the Hebrews' ancestors had already moved into the Levant before the events of Exodus, despite the time after Exodus being when they conquered the Canaanites that were already there?
Also, is it possible that some of the apparent Mesopotamian influences on Hebrew culture might have developed as a result of Babylonian captivity in the sixth century BC?
The issue is one of scripture vs archaeology. The earliest reference to Israel in writing is from around the 12th century BCE. But there is very little evidence of any actual sites of any kind of large scale polity in the region that would equate with a centrally organized state until after 1000 BCE.
So from an archaeological perspective, there is textual evidence of some kind of kingdom in or about the 13th to 12th century BC, but how large it was or how many people were there is unknown due to lack of any discoveries from the period. Also, we do know from the Nile Valley records that there were also other populations in the region, both before and later. The main evidence for the "Kingdom of Israel" comes later starting with the Lachish Stela showing the Assyrian sack of Judea and afterwards, in the post exile period which lead into the Greco Roman era. This is when most archaeological and historic information aligns with religious texts, such as the Kushites fighting against the Assyrians in the Levant.
quote: The Hebrew Bible depicts the Kingdom of Judah as a successor to the United Kingdom of Israel, a term denoting the united monarchy under biblical kings Saul, David and Solomon and covering the territory of Judah and Israel. However, during the 1980s, some biblical scholars began to argue that the archaeological evidence for an extensive kingdom before the late-8th century BCE is too weak, and that the methodology used to obtain the evidence is flawed.[6][7] In the 10th and early 9th centuries BCE, the territory of Judah appears to have been sparsely populated, limited to small rural settlements, most of them unfortified.[8] The Tel Dan Stele, discovered in 1993, shows that the kingdom, at least in some form, existed by the middle of the 9th century BCE, but it does not indicate the extent of its power.[9][10][11] Recent excavations at Khirbet Qeiyafa, however, support the existence of a centrally organized and urbanized kingdom by the 10th century BCE, according to the excavators.[6][12]
In the 7th century BCE, the kingdom's population increased greatly, prospering under Assyrian vassalage, despite Hezekiah's revolt against the Assyrian king Sennacherib.[13] Josiah took advantage of the political vacuum that resulted from Assyria's decline and the emergence of Egyptian rule over the area to enact his religious reforms. The Deuteronomistic history, which recounts the history of the nation from Joshua to Josiah and expresses a worldview based on the legal principles found in Deuteronomy, is assumed to have been written during this same time period and emphasizes the significance of upholding them.[14] With the final fall of the Neo-Assyrian Empire in 605 BCE, competition emerged between Egypt and the Neo-Babylonian Empire over control of the Levant, ultimately resulting in Judah's rapid decline. The early 6th century BCE saw a wave of Egyptian-backed Judahite rebellions against Babylonian rule being crushed. In 587 BCE, Nebuchadnezzar II besieged and destroyed Jerusalem, bringing an end to the kingdom.[15][14] A large number of Judeans were exiled to Babylon, and the fallen kingdom was then annexed as a Babylonian province.
As mentioned in other threads, it is the post exile period where we see the strong ties between Israel and Assyria/Babylon and thus the best documented evidence of influence genetically and culturally. However, from a DNA perspective there is still an open question on how those post exile populations related to those in the region from the pre-exile era, especially the Judeans depicted on the Lachish reliefs. Because outside of that, the archaeological evidence is relatively scarce.......
The biggest problem for an important region in human DNA history (which obviously has nothing to do with the Bible or Judaism) is the lack of ancient DNA from prior to the Neolithic or even during the Neolithic. So we get papers like this, which is talking about movements in the Neolithic era but nothing about the history of the Levant and Arabia from 40kya to 15kya. Basically nothing about the genetic history of the region between OOA and the Neolithic is being uncovered in this.
Posts: 8901 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ I think Doug has the correct idea in answering intellectually honest people like Brandon.
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP: Even if Y-DNA J did spread into Mesopotamia via the Hurrians, does that necessarily preclude the Hebrews' West Semitic forerunners having inherited it through admixture with them? Taz appears insistent that Abraham, as the foundational Israelite, had to have been Y-DNA E like the Natufians, but without skeletal remains we can confidently identify as his, that's hard to verify. We don't even know for sure if the biblical Abraham was a real individual as opposed to a mythical one like Heracles or Quetzalcoatl.
The problem is that Taz is a Biblical literalist who takes everything literal which of course poses a serious problem when both archaeology and genetics are applied. I won't even get into the Noah flood myth, but his assumption is that language and population are necessarily one to one. Hebrew is a Northwest Semitic language descended from original Proto-Semitic. The problem is that there were a number of languages spoken in Soutwest Asia and Semitic which is just ONE branch of Afrasian (the other branches were found in Africa) supposes African immigration. Another problem is that the Hebrews come from northern Mesopotamia so obviously there was an expansion and really exchange of languages going on.
Indo-Aryan which is a branch of Indo-European is spoken as far south in India as Sri-Lanka yet the people who speak it don't carry the IE 'steppe' lineages associated with IE. Any moron with common sense can understand how that happened.
Ehret stated: These are people who have been called Afro-Asiatic and also Afrasian. I'm saying "Afrasan" because I'm trying to get "Asia" out. There is still this idea that the Afro-Asiatic family had to come out of Asia. Once you realize that it's an African family with one little Asian offshoot, well, that itself is a very important lesson for world historians.
We actually have DNA evidence which fits very well with an intrusion of people from northeastern Africa into southwestern Asia. *The Y-chromosome markers, associated with the male, fade out as you go deeper into the Middle East.*
quote: Speaking of Abraham, didn't he father Ishmael through an Egyptian concubine named Hagar? Ishmael is claimed to be the ancestor of Arabic-speakers. I don't necessarily think the story is literally true, but might it nonetheless attest to the Hebrews perceiving early Arabic-speakers to have some connection to both their own culture and that of the Egyptians (and maybe other Africans)?
That's actually a fabrication that Ishmael is father of the 'Arabs'. Even early Hadiths say that Muhammad's tribal lineage goes back to a certain point and not further. The Ishmaelites' descendants were eventually Islamized but that does not mean they were the ancestral people of the Islamic prophet. The Ishmaelites are identified with tribes of the Sinai and Negev while the sons of Abraham by Keturah are identified with Negev, and northwestern Arabia.
Posts: 26381 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP: The problem is that Taz is a Biblical literalist who takes everything literal which of course poses a serious problem when both archaeology and genetics are applied. I won't even get into the Noah flood myth, but his assumption is that language and population are necessarily one to one.
In other words... you throw out the Bible when it contradicts your actual religion, which is population genetics.
I don't take everything in the Bible literally so that's not true, no idea where you got that from. I do, however, look at the context. For example when the Bible says God destroyed all flesh under heaven during the flood, and that only Noah and those on the ark with him survived any honest person who isn't biased in favor of genetic methodology will logically understand that the Bible is talking about a global event that killed all living flesh under heaven, especially humans.
Your whole genetic methodology falls apart if you accept the fact that the Bible is indeed talking about a global flood that killed all living humans.
Your reference to the Noah flood story as a "myth" also further demonstrates that you don't believe in the Bible and that you put genetic methodology over the Bible. And that's not even touching on the fact that Noah and his family were originally from Mesopotamia before the flood, and thus would logically have DNA that reflect this -- not DNA with origins in the caucusus.
Everything I just listed above are prime reasons why I was stupid for even entertaining any of your arguments in the first place.
You don't even believe in the Bible, you probably think we descend from or are related to apes.
Yet you try to make arguments about who is or isn't related to XYZ people in the Bible.
You literally throw out the Bible when it conflicts with your true religion.
Posts: 2628 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: That's actually a fabrication that Ishmael is father of the 'Arabs'. Even early Hadiths say that Muhammad's tribal lineage goes back to a certain point and not further. The Ishmaelites descendants were eventually Islamicized but that does not mean they were the ancestral people of the Islamic prophet. The Ishmaelites are identified with tribes of the Sinai and Negev while the sons of Abraham by Keturah are identified with Negev, and northwestern Arabia.
That makes sense. Ishmaelites originally referring to Sinai and Negev groups would place them in an intermediate position between Egyptians and Hebrews like the Genesis myth suggests.
posted
This is not a bible thread It's about DNA recovered in ancient human remains
I hope this will be the last excursion to religion, and calling Tazarah's name, someone who believes his views are bible based
This is supposed to be a science thread, although I allowed myself to take the detour but let that be temporary
There are already two bible based threads in Deshret forum
1)Where did the Bible´s Abraham come from?
2) Meanwhile in Megiddo: DNA family research reveals facts about Biblical Semites
Posts: 43016 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: This is not bible thread It's about DNA recovered in ancient human remains
I hope this will be the last excursion to religion, and calling Tazarah's name, someone who believes his views are bible based
For once I agree with you. Djehuti has a habit of constantly mentioning my name (even when he's claiming to be ignoring me) and this is the reason why I was pressing him so hard in the other thread and this one. It makes no sense to repeatedly and indirectly mention someone's name after claiming to have debunked them and claiming to be ignoring them. It's like he's begging for my attention and then when I give him my 100% undivided attention, I'm a "troll".
It's wild
Posts: 2628 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
I mention you to complain about your idiocy and lunacy. I ignored you in the other thread because like the typical troll you are, you kept bringing up issues that had NOTHING to do with actual topic. Now Lioness has started a topic debunking your lies and so your ass is in pain again.
quote:Originally posted by Tazarah:
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP: The problem is that Taz is a Biblical literalist who takes everything literal which of course poses a serious problem when both archaeology and genetics are applied. I won't even get into the Noah flood myth, but his assumption is that language and population are necessarily one to one.
In other words... you throw out the Bible when it contradicts your actual religion, which is population genetics.
No. I already explained to you dumb ass in another thread, that there are ways to interpret the bible and being literal on certain texts are not helpful for the obvious reasons. Even religious scholars who are of faith-- both Jewish and Christian-- don't do this.
quote:I don't take everything in the Bible literally so that's not true, no idea where you got that from. I do, however, look at the context. For example when the Bible says God destroyed all flesh under heaven during the flood, and that only Noah and those on the ark with him survived any honest person who isn't biased in favor of genetic methodology will logically understand that the Bible is talking about a global event that killed all living flesh under heaven, especially humans.
You see anyone familiar with the Torah especially Genesis understands that it is work of poetry meaning a lot hyperbole is used, as well as the fact that flood comes from a particular point of view of the people who lived in that region. So unless you can prove that when it said the flood affected all eretz meaning LAND-- as in the land the people lived in--and not olam meaning WORLD. Or the fact that flood waters literally killed all flesh that was not in the ark including fish who live in flood waters, then how could anyone take you serious??
quote:Your whole genetic methodology falls apart if you accept the fact that the Bible is indeed talking about a global flood that killed all living humans.
No. Genetics itself PROVES that there was no worldwide flood that killed everyone except for one family!! And again no bible expert believes that all creatures who weren't in the ark did not survive unless you want to believe like a preschooler that Noah rounded up a pair of every animal on earth!! LOL
quote:Your reference to the Noah flood story as a "myth" also further demonstrates that you don't believe in the Bible and that you put genetic methodology over the Bible. And that's not even touching on the fact that Noah and his family were originally from Mesopotamia before the flood, and thus would logically have DNA that reflect this -- not DNA with origins in the Caucasus.
See again, this shows your ignorance if not stupidity since if you know the actual definition of myth, you would know it does NOT mean a lie or fabrication necessarily. Also if Noah's family is ancestral to everyone on the planet then why are there lineages found only in Africans that predate anything found in Mesopotamia?? In fact why are there no flood myths in Africa barring those with Abrahamic influence??
quote:Everything I just listed above are prime reasons why I was stupid for even entertaining any of your arguments in the first place.
Everything you listed above exposes the depths of your ignorance on the bible, genetics, archaeology, zoology,... what else am I missing??
quote:You don't even believe in the Bible, you probably think we descend from or are related to apes.
Wrong as usual. I'm not one of those atheist types who cling to evolution like the gospel. And yes I am a bible believer but a smart one kike most biblical scholars not a dummy like you!
quote:Yet you try to make arguments about who is or isn't related to XYZ people in the Bible.
Well I go by evidence and not wishful thinking such as yourself.
quote:You literally throw out the Bible when it conflicts with your true religion.
I already told you, NO! So stop with the lies. I wish Tukuler was here, he is a Bible believing (black) Jew and he too would laugh at your idiotic child-like interpretations that lack nuance. Posts: 26381 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Genesis 12:4–5 4 So Abram departed, as the Lord had spoken unto him; and Lot went with him: and Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran. 5 And Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother’s son, and all their substance that they had gathered, and the souls that they had gotten in Haran; and they went forth to go into the land of Canaan; and into the land of Canaan they came. _____________________________ This accounts for 2 males, Abraham and Lot and his wife Sarai.
Since we have no other source than the bible you would have to have a verse saying he came with part of a tribe
Yet somehow you missed the part about them gathering "souls" as in people who were faithful followers.
Posts: 26381 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
^This clown is still typing long-winded walls of nonsense and still trying to convince people that "all flesh under heaven" and "only Noah and those with him on the ark survived" doesn't equal a global event in which all humans were killed. And he for some reason still thinks that fish = humans.
PROVERBS 10:19 NLT
"19 Too much talk leads to sin. Be sensible and keep your mouth shut." Posts: 2628 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Look at the idiot above who still takes the hyperbole of "all flesh" literally so that the flood somehow killed all the fish through what, drowning? And somehow all the animals living today descend from Noah's ark. LOL
Since there's no arguing with that illogic. It's back to ignoring the fool.
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP: That makes sense. Ishmaelites originally referring to Sinai and Negev groups would place them in an intermediate position between Egyptians and Hebrews like the Genesis myth suggests.
Indeed, the Genesis legend suggests Egyptian genetic, if not cultural, influence in the said region.
There is some obfuscation due to the fact that the Ishmaelites are often grouped together with the tribes descending from Abraham's sons by Keturah who inhabit northern Arabia from the Gulf of Aqaba in the west to the Euphrates River and Persian Gulf in the east i.e. Arabia Petraea. All of these bedouin tribes were traditionally grouped under the moniker of 'Hagarites' after their matriarch Hagar which is based on the popular rabbinic tradition that Hagar and Keturah are the same person. This tradition is based on the exegesis of the passage in Genesis that Abraham "returned" to Keturah indicating a previous relationship but no other evidence. This rabbinic tradition goes on to say that God changed her name from Hagar, meaning 'immigrant' or 'stranger', to Keturah meaning 'incensed'. However, the Karaite Jewish tradition maintains that they were two different people with Keturah being a native Arabian descended from Sheba and that Abraham married her when he first reached Canaan as a way of legitimizing this settlement there. Keturah's heritage is shown not only by her name but also the name of her home territory 'Beersheba' meaning 'Well of Sheba' as well as the names of her grandsons which are were named after Arabian ancestors (Sheba and Dedan). Not to mention the fact that Abraham taking a second wife is consistent with the tradition of patriarchs practicing bigamy from antediluvian times to Abraham's grandson Jakob who married Rachel and Leah.
Qedarite Kingdom
Another thing interesting is that while the bible only says that Ishmael married an Egyptian girl picked by his mother Hagar, rabbinic tradition elaborates and says the name of this Egyptian bride is A'ishat or Aisha and that he later took a second wife from the Canaanites named Fatima!! In Islam Aisha is the name of Muhammad's favorite wife while Fatima is the name of his favorite daughter. The Islamic tradition itself holds that when Hagar and Ishmael were sent into exile by Sarah and sought refuge in Mecca, they were shown hospitality by the local Jurhum tribe who later gave Ishmael a bride named Rala bint Mudad who taught him the Arabic language and thus became an ancestor of Adnan, forefather of the Adnani Arabs. This tradition sounds rather suspect.
Posts: 26381 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic