This is topic Why AE are viewed as Asians by some non Africans? in forum Deshret at EgyptSearch Forums.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=15;t=000129

---

Posted by Habari (Member # 14738) on :
 
It is quite obvious for an African that AE are pretty much similar to other East African people physically...and skeletal remains show strong elongated features typical of Africans super Negros(as they call them in anthropology...the long neck, long bodies, very dark skin in some instance, and big eyes are typically African)...so why people think they are Asian...I want to explore the genuine part of that perception...not the cynical part...it's obvious that some non Africans think genuinely that AE are Asians...why is that? Actually the first time someone told me that they were Black in real life, was a guy from Djibouti, basically he told me I met some indigenous Egyptian performing in a concert and they look like Black Africans...when you look at pictures you see whatever you want...but when an African from the same region tells you that...you just have to believe it...






Black or white? Egyptian immigrant fights for black classification
Hefny

July 16, 1997
Web posted at: 4:22 a.m. EDT (0822 GMT)

From Correspondent Joan MacFarlane

DETROIT (CNN) -- An Egyptian immigrant is suing the U.S. government because they've told him he's white when his entire life he's been black.

Mostafa Hefny was born in Egypt and has always been proud of his Egyptian culture and his African ancestry. But when Hefny immigrated to America, the U.S. government told him he was no longer a black man.

"I was not told by Immigration that I was white until I passed the exam for citizenship and then I was told I am now white," he explains.

Hefny initially laughed when told of his new racial classification, but he's no longer chuckling. He recently filed suit against the U.S. government to get his race classification changed back from white to black.

"It hurts me. It definitely hurts me," Hefny says. "It hurts me because I am unable to reconcile my reality as a black person."

In addition to the emotional hurt, Hefny says that when the government changed his race, they also changed his social status.

"Definitely, I would've had more opportunity for advancement and even for hiring had I been considered black," he says. "I was prevented from applying and requesting positions and other benefits for minority person because I knew I was legally white."
Origin determines race
Hefny

One of the problems with the naturalization process, in Hefny's opinion, is that race is classified by geographic location and not ancestry. That's part of the immigration process his lawsuit hopes to change.

The lawsuit targets Directive Number 15 of the U.S. Office of Management and Budget. The directive defines black as a person having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa. A white person is defined as having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, North Africa or the Middle East.

"In the late '60s and early '70s, they found that different agencies were using different definitions for the same categories of people, and they thought it was important to have comprehensibility across federal agencies," explains Sally Katzen of the OMB.

The OMB is hoping to change the way they define races by revamping the troublesome directive.

"The principle we thought very important is self-identification," Katzen says. "I think that it is almost beyond dispute that an individual should identify himself or herself rather than have someone else do it."

Although it seems the government agrees with Hefny in principle, it refuses to respond publicly to his lawsuit. He expects that response later this year.
 

---

Posted by Glider (Member # 12976) on :
 
Habari,

The answer to your question is here:


Population history of north Africa: evidence from classical genetic markers.

Bosch E, Calafell F, Pérez-Lezaun A, Comas D, Mateu E, Bertranpetit J.

Laboratori d'Antropologia, Facultat de Biologia, Universitat de Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain.

After an intensive bibliographic search, we compiled all the available data on allele frequencies for classical genetic polymorphisms referring to North African populations and synthesized the data in an attempt to reconstruct the populations' demographic history using two complementary methods: (1) principal components analysis and (2) genetic distances represented by neighbor-joining trees. In both analyses the main feature of the genetic landscape in northern Africa is an east-west pattern of variation pointing to the differentiation between the Berber and Arab population groups of the northwest and the populations of Libya and Egypt. Moreover, Libya and Egypt show the smallest genetic distances with the European populations, including the Iberian Peninsula. The most plausible interpretation of these results is that, although demic diffusion during the Neolithic could explain the genetic similarity between northeast Africa and Europe by a parallel process of gene flow from the Near East, a Mesolithic (or older) differentiation of the populations in the northwestern regions with later limited gene flow is needed to understand the genetic picture. The most isolated groups (Mauritanians, Tuaregs, and south Algerian Berbers) were the most differentiated and, although no clear structure can be discerned among the different Arab- and Berber-speaking groups, Arab speakers as a whole are closer to Egyptians and Libyans. By contrast, the genetic contribution of sub-Saharan Africa appears to be small.

PIP: An extensive bibliographic search was conducted to compile all available data on allele frequencies for classical genetic polymorphisms referring to North African populations. The data were then synthesized to reconstruct the population's demographic history using principal components analysis and genetic distances represented by neighbor-joining trees. Both analyses identified an east-west pattern of genetic variation in northern Africa pointing to the differentiation between the Berber and Arab population groups of the northwest and the populations of Libya and Egypt. Libya and Egypt are also the smallest genetic distances away from European populations. Demic diffusion during the Neolithic period could explain the genetic similarity between northeast Africa and Europe through a parallel process of gene flow from the Near East, but a Mesolithic or older differentiation of the populations into the northwestern regions with later limited gene flow is needed to understand this genetic picture. Mauritanians, Tuaregs, and south Algerian Berbers, the most isolated groups, were the most differentiated, while Arab speakers overall are closer to Egyptians and Libyans. The genetic contribution of sub-Saharan Africa appears to be small.

Publication Types:
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

PMID: 9164042 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


BTW, your article seems to have forgotten to mention the fact that DR HEFNY IS NUBIAN.
 

---

Posted by Habari (Member # 14738) on :
 
Glider,
Do you realize that what you just posted says that Europeans mixed with Black Africans? Do you realize that? Just do some search about E3b and Neolithic farmers that introduced farming in Europe? I'm not sure about your education background...but just google up what I've just written...E3b is mainly found in the area of ancient European civilization like Greece, 1/3 of Greeks have the African E3b gene, that's what the article says...Neolithic farmers who introduced farming in Europe carried that gene which indicate Black African ancestry..
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ LOL Glider realises all that since genetics is discussed here all the time and everyone here knows E3b an African genetic signature is found in southern Europe and the Levant, but Glider is in DENIAL. As he is in denial with everything else about Egypt.

Also, Hefny may be Nubian but this Fellah man from Abydos is not:




 

---

Posted by Glider (Member # 12976) on :
 
Also, other studies have been done which prove that the populations of Modern Egypt and Ancient Egypt are essentially the same people genetically.


Secrets of the Pharaohs
Episode 2: Lost City of the Pyramids
(minute 42)

NARRATOR: But in order to figure out the significance of the pyramids to later generations, the archaeologists still had to find out who the builders had been. Zahi turned back to the tombs, looking for the missing links that would definitively establish who these people were, where they were from, and what had motivated them to take part in this massive project. These questions hold great cultural significance for modern Egyptians, who have had to endure many bizarre theories about who built their most precious national treasures.

DR. ZAHI HAWASS (EGYPTIAN UNDERSECRETARY, GIZA MONUMENTS): It's very important to know that they were Egyptians. They were not people who came out of the space. They were not came from lost civilizations as we hear these days many stories that do not really have any truth in them at all.

NARRATOR: But would the bones support Zahi's contention that the workforce was Egyptian? Before the discoveries at Giza, scientists in Cairo had been analyzing the DNA of modern Egyptians. Now, they had managed to successfully extract DNA from the ancient bones. A genetic comparison would be able to establish whether a relationship existed. The results were definitive.

DR. MOAMENA KAMEL (IMMUNOLOGIST, CAIRO UNIVERSITY): People who are living here, they are the same as the people who had been living 6000 years ago. OK? And now the moderns are the descendants of these ancient Egyptians.

NARRATOR: The DNA confirmed a close relationship between the modern Egyptians living in the Nile Valley and the ancient workers who had been buried there. For Zahi, this was an extremely significant find.

ZAHI HAWASS: It proves -- for no doubt -- that the builders of the pyramids were Egyptians. And you know, if they were not Egyptians, they would not have been buried here. They would never be buried in the same method of the ancient Egyptians. You do not have any doubt to tell us that those people are Egyptians at all. They were Egyptian by blood.
 

---

Posted by Habari (Member # 14738) on :
 
The above post is not serious...many modern indigenous view themselves as Black even the ex-moderator of this forum is from Egypt and view himself as Black...I'm from Africa and don't care about AE personally...but I met with people who met with indigenous Egyptians who have less mixed blood as people from Northern Egypt like Mubarak...they told me that they look Black...I don't know your agenda Glider...but you have a problem...By the way indigenous people are mainly located in the south and don't really look like Egyptians from Cairo or Iraeli, Palestinians or Europeans...Actually some don't even have the same fine features as other East Africans...they tend to look more Sudanese or Central Africans...
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ *Yawn* Habari, don't take the angry Afrangi seriously. Again, he is in a state of psychotic delusion. We have been over this issue a dozen times now...

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

First of all, Hawass is not a geneticist so appealing to his authority on genetic matters is not very wise.

Second, I am aware of the report you speak of and to be precise Hawass's initial statement which he took directly from the geneticists was that the ancient pyramid workers were the same as modern workers in the same area of Giza.

Have you seen how these modern workers look like? Here is a photo of one below



And lastly, it is foolish to make the blanket statement that ancient Egyptians are genetically the same as modern Egyptians when it is a basic fact of history as well as genetics that the populations of Egypt have changed drastically in the last couple of millennia due to foreign invasions and immigrations!

When it comes to genetic lineage, there are various facets like mitochondrial DNA, Y-chromosomal DNA, nuclear DNA, etc. Yet all the studies make it clear that the original lineages of the Egyptian people before all the foreign incursions was African.

Here is a map showing Y-chromosome lineages.



^ The Egyptian sample comes from the Delta area, yet notice the percentage of African E lineages in green.

Not surprisingly, the amoung of African lineages increase the farther one goes south and especially in rural areas where people have mixed little with outsiders.

Hawass can call the ancient Egyptians his ancestors if he wants, since he very well could descend from native Egyptians, however his physical appearance as well as the fact that he was born in the city of Damietta (an Arab settlement turned colonial city during the Islamic invasions), can safely say that he is NOT the same as his ancestors who were native to Egypt.

---

Here by the way is a genetic map of the world:



^ Notice African E lineages (specifically E3b) is found in southern Europe such as Greece and the Levant such as Palestine which makes genetic distances between these areas and Egypt small as well as as with other parts of Sub-Saharan East Africa.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
Here are more non-Arab non Asian and non-Nubian Egyptians:







Of course the only images Glider can post are Arab Egyptians who deny their black African heritage.
 

---

Posted by Glider (Member # 12976) on :
 
ANCIENT EGYPTIANS





 

---

Posted by Glider (Member # 12976) on :
 
ANCIENT EGYPTIANS



 

---

Posted by Habari (Member # 14738) on :
 
Djehuti,
I want him to explain us why Greek have so much Black African blood:1/3 of their gene makeup is Black African...So not only Black African people contribute to AE but also to the Ancient Greek civilization which produced democracy which is the back bone of the "Western Civilization".
Conclusion: Without the Afro-Asiatic induced Neolithic revolution in Europe....no America....
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Glider:
ANCIENT EGYPTIANS

---

^ Okay, we know. You posted those same images before. What's your point? If it's their features, we told you a hundred times before that black Africans in other parts of Africa have those same features.
 

---

Posted by Glider (Member # 12976) on :
 
MODERN EGYPTIAN SCHOOL GIRLS






 

---

Posted by lamin (Member # 5777) on :
 
Also there is no caption as to what periods in Egypt's 3,000 year history{start with the AD 1 and figure out how far we have to go to get to the AD3000] the above figure belonged to. Also, merely having a sculpture being done in AE does not signify anything about origins.

But there is also a serious problematic with so-called "genetic distance". Is it measured cladistically or geno-taxonomically?

The sensible way to go about getting some idea of what the AEs were is to examine their murals where they portrayed themselves in GROUPS. Finally recent genetic tests[paper escapes me at the moment] on remains of AEs show that they were very heavily pigmented.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Glider:
MODERN EGYPTIAN SCHOOL GIRLS

---

^ Yeah, Arab Egyptians. LOL What did I tell you guys!
 

---

Posted by Habari (Member # 14738) on :
 
They look Arabs, they don't look Africans...
 

---

Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
 
Look, you're going to find light skinned thin
featured people of non-continental African
extraction in every period of Egypt's history
from the LSA and neolithic periods right up
to the Greek takeover.

There weren't human DNA tuned "bug zappers"
at the border. People were drawn to the place for
the same reasons they flock to 1st world economy
nations today.

The thing is the frequency of non-continentals
is miniscule compared to continentals and that's
why The South Will Rise Again Dixie Glider must
post the same images over and over again and
also why he can't distinguish the one from the
other so that some of his picture spam is of
light skinned thin featured continental Africans
instead of what he believes are "white people"
or "off-white people" or whatever the fudge he
thinks they are.
 

---

Posted by Glider (Member # 12976) on :
 
The Black Cheerleader's Source for these pictures is NUBIA-NET!! -- What a LIAR?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
Here are more non-Arab non Asian and non-Nubian Egyptians:

[*IMG]http://www.sat7.org/multimedia/photos/8.jpg[/IMG]

[*IMG]http://www.sorth.dk/p/20050219sml/Med/dsc_3472.jpg[/IMG]

[*IMG]http://www.nubianet.org/about/img/1C3_7.jpg[/IMG]

Of course the only images Glider can post are Arab Egyptians who deny their black African heritage.

---

 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ So?! Nubianet has plenty of pictures of Egyptians not just Nubians! All of those pics are of Egyptians! LOL
 

---

Posted by Glider (Member # 12976) on :
 
EGYPTIAN VICTORY - BACK-TO-BACK 2006 & 2008



 

---

Posted by kenndo (Member # 4846) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Habari:
It is quite obvious for an African that AE are pretty much similar to other East African people physically...and skeletal remains show strong elongated features typical of Africans super Negros(as they call them in anthropology...the long neck, long bodies, very dark skin in some instance, and big eyes are typically African)...so why people think they are Asian...I want to explore the genuine part of that perception...not the cynical part...it's obvious that some non Africans think genuinely that AE are Asians...why is that? Actually the first time someone told me that they were Black in real life, was a guy from Djibouti, basically he told me I met some indigenous Egyptian performing in a concert and they look like Black Africans...when you look at pictures you see whatever you want...but when an African from the same region tells you that...you just have to believe it...

---

quote:

---

Also, other studies have been done which prove that the populations of Modern Egypt and Ancient Egypt are essentially the same people genetically.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evergreen:
Determination of optimal rehydration, fixation and staining methods for histological and immunohistochemical analysis of mummified soft tissues A-M Mekota1, M Vermehren2

Biotechnic & Histochemistry 2005, 80(1): 7_/13

"Materials and methods
In 1997, the German Institute for Archaeology headed an excavation of the tombs of the nobles in Thebes-West, Upper Egypt. At this time, three types of tissues were sampled from different mummies: meniscus (fibrocartilage), skin, and placenta. Archaeological findings suggest that the mummies dated from the New Kingdom (approximately
1550_/1080 BC).

The basal epithelial cells were packed with melanin as expected for specimens of Negroid origin."

---

quote:

---

Seriously, rasol, why are you trying him/her.

---

quote:

---

Determination of optimal rehydration, fixation and staining methods for histological and immunohistochemical analysis of mummified soft tissues A-M Mekota1, M Vermehren2

Biotechnic & Histochemistry 2005, 80(1): 7_/13

"Materials and methods
In 1997, the German Institute for Archaeology headed an excavation of the tombs of the nobles in Thebes-West, Upper Egypt. At this time, three types of tissues were sampled from different mummies: meniscus (fibrocartilage), skin, and placenta. Archaeological findings suggest that the mummies dated from the New Kingdom (approximately
1550_/1080 BC).

The basal epithelial cells were packed with melanin as expected for specimens of Negroid origin."

---

^ Trolls are denoted not only by what they make noise about, but also by what they are *defeaningly silent* about.
 

---

Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
 
Glider can also address Champollion, who deciphered 'ancient egyptian' via the Rosetta stone:


The first tribes that inhabited Egypt, that is, the Nile Valley between the Syene cataract and the sea, came from Abyssinia to Sennar. The ancient Egyptians belonged to a race quite similar to the Kennous or Barabras, present inhabitants of Nubia. In the Copts of Egypt, we do not find any of the characteristic features of the ancient Egyptian population. The Copts are the result of crossbreeding with all the nations that have successively dominated Egypt. It is wrong to seek in them the principal features of the old race.

Why would Champollion say this after visiting Egypt over 100 years ago?

What's wrong.... Don't the modern Egyptians look *the same* as Ancient Egyptians?

If not, why not?

Why does Champollion think that ancient egyptians are related to modern nubians, and ethiopians, and *not* the modern Copts of the delta whom he is referring to?

For the fun of it, lets assume that Champollion is wrong.

What led Champollion to the wrong conclusions?
 

---

Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ LOL Glider realises all that since genetics is discussed here all the time and everyone here knows E3b an African genetic signature is found in southern Europe and the Levant, but Glider is in DENIAL. As he is in denial with everything else about Egypt.

Also, Hefny may be Nubian but this Fellah man from Abydos is not:

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Glider:

Habari,

The answer to your question is here:


Population history of north Africa: evidence from classical genetic markers.

Bosch E, Calafell F, Pérez-Lezaun A, Comas D, Mateu E, Bertranpetit J.

Laboratori d'Antropologia, Facultat de Biologia, Universitat de Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain.

After an intensive bibliographic search, we compiled all the available data on allele frequencies for classical genetic polymorphisms referring to North African populations and synthesized the data in an attempt to reconstruct the populations' demographic history using two complementary methods: (1) principal components analysis and (2) genetic distances represented by neighbor-joining trees. In both analyses the main feature of the genetic landscape in northern Africa is an east-west pattern of variation pointing to the differentiation between the Berber and Arab population groups of the northwest and the populations of Libya and Egypt. Moreover, Libya and Egypt show the smallest genetic distances with the European populations, including the Iberian Peninsula. The most plausible interpretation of these results is that, although demic diffusion during the Neolithic could explain the genetic similarity between northeast Africa and Europe by a parallel process of gene flow from the Near East, a Mesolithic (or older) differentiation of the populations in the northwestern regions with later limited gene flow is needed to understand the genetic picture. The most isolated groups (Mauritanians, Tuaregs, and south Algerian Berbers) were the most differentiated and, although no clear structure can be discerned among the different Arab- and Berber-speaking groups, Arab speakers as a whole are closer to Egyptians and Libyans. By contrast, the genetic contribution of sub-Saharan Africa appears to be small.

Publication Types:
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

PMID: 9164042 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

---

So what are we to make of this study? Well the reason why genetic distances between these groups is small is because of demic diffusion from Africa into Europe during not only Neolithic times but Mesolithic times as well in the case of the Iberian peninsula. Of course the Arabic speakers of Egypt and Libya are closest related to Egyptians than non-Arabic speakers of the Maghreb simply because many Arab speakers have ancestry from the ancient Egyptians. But this is not to say they don't have any foreign ancestry as everyone knows Libya and especially Egypt has experienced immigration of foreigners.

Also the last part about little influence from Sub-Sahara is misleading-- actually the whole article is because they fail to specify what the lineage is -- that is E3b1 which ultimately did originate in Sub-Sahara.



^ Notice how much African E lineage is present among the Arab Egyptian sample. Heck even the Arabs of Oman carry African E lineages! You can't tell a persons ancestry by looks alone. There are many light-skinned 'Arab' peoples with significant black African ancestry and even among such folks you can still tell by the hint of certain features that their ancestors were black.

Sorry Glider.
 

---

Posted by Glider (Member # 12976) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug M:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ LOL Glider realises all that since genetics is discussed here all the time and everyone here knows E3b an African genetic signature is found in southern Europe and the Levant, but Glider is in DENIAL. As he is in denial with everything else about Egypt.

Also, Hefny may be Nubian but this Fellah man from Abydos is not:

[*IMG]http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2049/1989808899_70d59f3724.jpg?v=0[/IMG]

---

Hefny is as Egyptian as the man from Abydos. Nubia is a ethnic reference, but they are STILL EGYPTIAN by nationality and have ALWAYS been. There has never been a state or kingdom called Nubia that defined a nubian nationality. Therefore, trying to pretend that Nubians are NOT Egyptians is about as racist and stupid as saying native Americans are not part of the U.S.A. So-called "nubians" Nubians have been in that region since BEFORE there was a country called Egypt. They ARE the closest example to what the ancient folks of that part of the Nile looked like going back 5,000 -10,000 years and more. So the ONLY reason to call then Nubian, is to try and create a FAKE dichotomy between black Africans of largely INDIGENOUS ancestry and other Africans of non indigenous ancestry, with those of non indigenous ancestry being passed off as aboriginal....

This seems to be Glider's point.

---

The Black Cheerleader is making a CARPETBAGGER out of himself, AGAIN.

The Ancient Egyptians were NOT NUBIANS and went out of their way to SHOW THAT NUBIANS ARE VERY DIFFERENT. Try to get this through your THICK SKULL.

All it takes for an inteligent person is one look at some of the Ancient Egyptian Art to understand that the people of Ancient Egypt were NOT BLACK AFRICANS and their SOUTHERN NEIGHBORS (NUBIANS,ETC..), WERE INDEED, BLACK AFRICANS, but some of them were MIXED. Your problem is judging the Ancients by your limited racist environment, THE BLACK SOUTH, where Philipino could be considered BLACK.


 

---

Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
 
^ The Black Egyptian, and Non Egyptian "CarpetBagger"....

quote:

---

it takes for an inteligent person

---

Only Abaza is dumb-enough to botch and attempted insult by mispelling intelligent.
 

---

Posted by yazid904 (Member # 7708) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Glider:
EGYPTIAN VICTORY - BACK-TO-BACK 2006 & 2008

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Glider:

The Black Cheerleader is making a CARPETBAGGER out of himself, AGAIN.

---

quote:

---

The Ancient Egyptians were NOT NUBIANS and went out of their way to SHOW THAT NUBIANS ARE VERY DIFFERENT. Try to get this through your THICK SKULL.

---

quote:

---

All it takes for an inteligent person is one look at some of the Ancient Egyptian Art to understand that the people of Ancient Egypt were NOT BLACK AFRICANS and their SOUTHERN NEIGHBORS (NUBIANS,ETC..), WERE INDEED, BLACK AFRICANS, but some of them were MIXED...

---

quote:

---

Your problem is judging the Ancients by your limited racist environment, THE BLACK SOUTH, where Philipino could be considered BLACK.

---

LMAO Nope. I don't have a racist problem but YOU do if you continue to deny that the ancient Egyptians who built one of the earliest and most sophisticated civilizations were black Africans. Here in the south Filippinos such as myself are not considered black not even by black people, but ANYWHERE in the world these people below are black!

Tut:







Amenhotep III


Hatshepsut


Thutmose III



Ramses the Great:




 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ It looks like there are no carpetbaggers here. Only a manure-seller named Glider...

But it looks like nobody is buying his manure. Why?
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Glider:
The Black Cheerleader's Source for these pictures is NUBIA-NET!! -- What a LIAR?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
Here are more non-Arab non Asian and non-Nubian Egyptians:

[*IMG]http://www.sat7.org/multimedia/photos/8.jpg[/IMG]

[*IMG]http://www.sorth.dk/p/20050219sml/Med/dsc_3472.jpg[/IMG]

[*IMG]http://www.nubianet.org/about/img/1C3_7.jpg[/IMG]

---

---

Oh yeah, I forgot to point out (just to show who the REAL liar is). That only the last picture is from Nubia-Net. The others are not. But even the last picture from Nubia-net shows a non-Nubian Egyptian man from Luxor in the tomb of Senefer in the Valley of the Kings. The narration shows that the rural Egyptian man has the same skin color as the tomb owner-- an ancestor of his.

So there goes more manure that missed.
 

---

Posted by Glider (Member # 12976) on :
 

quote:

---

THE BLACK CARPETBAGGER SAYS:

No. All it takes is an intelligent person to look at many works of Egyptian art to understand that the Egyptians were indeed black Africans. This is also supported by archaeology, physical anthropology, and more recently genetics. Yet you are in DENIAL of all of these FACTS!

By the way, you still have not explained how some Nubians were "mixed". Who were they mixed with?? What evidence shows they were mixed with anything? Sounds like more manure-selling.

---

NOW FEAST YOUR EYES: MR BLACK CARPETBAGGER!
 

---

Posted by Glider (Member # 12976) on :
 
OPEN YOUR BLACK RACIST EYES A LITTLE WIDER: AND SMILE!



ANCIENT EGYPT WAS NOT A BLACK NATION! REPEAT A 100 TIMES...SILLY LITTLE BLACK FILIPINO!
 

---

Posted by Glider (Member # 12976) on :
 
SMILE...YOUR SILLY LITTLE BLACK FACE IS ON CANDID CAMERA!




REPEAT AFTER ME: ANCIENT EGYPT WAS NOT A BLACK AFRICAN NATION
 

---

Posted by Habari (Member # 14738) on :
 
Glider: the more racist remarks you make the less convincing your arguments are...I think your racist thoughts are clearly transparent and leads you to post selective pictures about AE...anyway as I said earlier you are just the product of America's race obsessed society...nothing can be done about you...let's pray for your redemption...
 

---

Posted by Glider (Member # 12976) on :
 
KEEP LOOKING YOU LITTLE FOOL: AND DON'T FORGET TO REPEAT THE PHRASE:

ANCIENT EGYPT WAS NOT A BLACK AFRICAN NATION!




 

---

Posted by Glider (Member # 12976) on :
 
SOME ANCIENT WISDOM FOR A SILLY LITTLE BLACK FILIPINO...DON'T FORGET TO REPEAT THE PHRASE



 

---

Posted by Glider (Member # 12976) on :
 
THE TRUTH HURTS: BUT KEEPING LOOKING ANYWAY!






DON'T FORGET THE CHANT!
ANCIENT EGYPT WAS NOT A BLACK AFRICAN NATION!

 

---

Posted by Glider (Member # 12976) on :
 
ANOTHER ONE FOR YOUR LITTLE BRAIN TO CHEW ON:






REPEAT: ANCIENT EGYPT WAS NOT A BLACK AFRICAN NATION...
 

---

Posted by Glider (Member # 12976) on :
 
THERE IS -NO-END-IN-SIGHT- FOR YOUR LITTLE BRAIN: JUST KEEP LOOKING AND TRY TO BREATHE IN BETWEEN, YOU SILLY LITTLE CARPETBAGGER.



 

---

Posted by Glider (Member # 12976) on :
 
ONE LOOK IS ALL IT TAKES: SILLY LITTLE CARPETBAGGER....IN YOUR CASE WE HAVE TO WEDGE IT IN A LITTLE HARDER.



REPEAT AFTER ME: ANCIENT EGYPT WAS NOT A BLACK AFRICAN NATION.
 

---

Posted by Glider (Member # 12976) on :
 
EVEN THE DWARFS WILL MAKE A LITTLE SILLY BLACK CARPETBAGGER - SCRATCH HIS BRAINLESS HEAD.


 

---

Posted by Glider (Member # 12976) on :
 
THE BLACK CARPETBAGGER TAKES HIS FIRST BATH!



 

---

Posted by Glider (Member # 12976) on :
 
THERE IS A LITTLE HOPE FOR OUR BLACK CARPETBAGGER; THE TRUTH HURTS==BUT TRY TO SWALLOW YOUR BLACK PRIDE A LITTLE...SILLY LITTLE FILIPINO.



 

---

Posted by Mmmkay (Member # 10013) on :
 
^^Seriously guy, what are you proving? They already showed various genetic graphs and studies and meanwhile you keep spamming selective pics. You already lost. Just deal with it
 

---

Posted by lamin (Member # 5777) on :
 
The reasons why AEs are viewed as "Asian" by some non-Africans are essentially twofold.

1) The first reason is racial Eurocentrism. The fact that Africa was increasingly subjugated by Europe soon after the expulsion of the Moors in 1492 plus the defeat of Songhay at the battle of Tondibi(1593. See Timbuktu historians Abderrahman Sadi and Mahmoud Kati texts "Tariqh es-Soudan and Tariqh el-Fettach for eyewitness accounts of the event)by a Moroccan-Spanish expedition) meant that there had to be an ideological justification for the Atlantic trade in captive humans to the Americas.

The explanation that was dredged up was that "Africans are a biologically inferior sub-group of humanity whose role was restricted to that of being the slaves of Europeans in the new capitalist venture". Thus Africans could not have produced what Europeans called "civilization".

Though there was empirical evidence of an impressive and very early civilization in Africa--i.e. Ancient Egypt--it could not have been developed singlehandely by Africans. So, as the German philosopher Hegel put it, "Egypt was geographically in Africa--but not OF Africa". This was the basis for the Eurocentric idea of an "invading dynastic race"(Breasted) and the subsequent "Hamitic hypothesis"(Seligman) of "invading caucasoids from Asia".

And even so, Ancient Egypt was viewed in European circles as a "Semitic civilization" of Asian origin. In fact, even today in the museums[war booty staches] of the West Ancient Egyptian art is housed in the "Semitic or Oriental Art" section. Never in the "African Art" section.

So that's the surviving paradigm: Africans/blacks are biologically inferior to Europeans and Asians in terms of intellectual endowments so they could not have created "civilization".

2)The second reason is a cultural-colonial-historical one. The Arab expansion through invasions into West Asia and North Africa created a whole new culture area. Christianity was erased from North Africa and replaced by Islam. The Arabic language also replaced most of the indigenous languages in most of North Africa and West Asia--except in Iran, Afghanistan and Turkey. And the colonial fealty to Arabia and Arabism was cemented by one of the pillars of Islam which required an annual pilgrimage to Macca. Thus the rule was look East and pray--looking East.

Thus a whole new colonial cultre area was established that stretched from Morocco to Pakistan in the East and from Spain to the Equator in Africa.

That Islamic culture area lost some ground with the expulsion of the Moors and Arabs from Spain in the late 15th century and the eventual repulse of the Turks from Central Europe dating from the 14th century to the 18th century. The Turks had conquered all of North Africa and West Asia during the Ottoman period but when ultimately defeated by the West during WWI all its colonial territories passed over into Western hands from Iraq and all of North Africa.

The West adminstered the newly acquired areas but did not seek to change the religion nor did it render obsolete the Arabic language. Though French, Italian and English were imposed as official languages in those areas. This is the geopolitical basis for bringing all the Arabic speaking areas and those fully immersed in Islam(Turkey, Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, etc.) under one culture-area umbrella: the Near East and the Middle East. Note that Sudan is offically--i.e. by Western fiat--part of the "Middle East".

What has compounded matters is the fact that with the Arab invasions into North Africa came new migrants from West Asia in the tradition of previous migrants and invaders from Greece, Rome, Persia, Turkey, etc.

So from a Western perspective and from the perspective of Arab colonisation the intellectual and the psychological mindset of North Africans the Maghreb(North Africa) is part of West Asia and the so-called "Arab world".

Interesting phenomenon: The French and Italians colonised North Africa--with the French claiming that Algeria was part of France. The French established a large settler colony in Algeria but they were subsequently driven out. The Italians had to withdraw from Libya too, but aapart from intermittent uprisings from the Berbers Arabism with its cultural accoutrement of Islam has not been seriously challenged. Just as Christianity and the European cultural/linguistic colonisation of the Americas has never been seriously challenged. The Mayans, Incas, Aztecs are just history now.

Yet the Europeans were expelled from Asia and most of Africa though leaving behind their self-serving colonial apparatuses--legal systems, languages, colonial boundaries, colonial infrastructures--which still wield enormous influence and power especially in Africa.

The French at one time marked out an impressive amount of territory in so-called "French Indo-China" but the Vietnamese put a huge hurting on them in 1954 causing them to flee the area. Uncle "let me do it" Sam rode in to the rescue but was also rebuffed. So all France has now as colonial booty is Quebec, Cayenne, Tahiti and New Calendonia. And a few island specks here and there--Martinoque, Guadeloupe, St Baarts, etc. That's where the American "surrender monkeys" comes from.

So the question is: why hasn't Arabism and Islam expelled from North Africa and Egypt? is it the same reason why Europeanism in all its dimensions has not been expelled or extirpated--as in the case of Vietnam--from the Americas?
 

---

Posted by Glider (Member # 12976) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mmmkay:
^^Seriously guy, what are you proving? They already showed various genetic graphs and studies and meanwhile you keep spamming selective pics. You already lost. Just deal with it

---

READ AND LEARN MY FRIEND; DON'T BE A CARPETBAGGER TOO!


Genetics

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Genetics of Modern Egyptians

Cavalli-Sforza et al. (1994) compared populations from throughout the world using extensive genetic data. The North African populations grouped with West Eurasian (European, Middle East) populations rather than sub-Saharan Africans.


Di Rienzo et al. (1994) studied the relationship of three samples (taken from Egyptians, Sardinians, and sub-Saharan Africans), using mitochondrial DNA and simple sequence repeats. In terms of genetic distance, the Egyptian sample was closer to the Sardinian sample than to the sub-Saharan African sample.


Hammer et al. (1997) used seven different methods to compute population trees of world populations, using Y-chromosome data. All seven methods grouped the Egyptians with the non-African populations rather than with the sub-Saharan Africans. Egyptians' genetic profile resembles that of South Europeans more than the other regional groups in the study.


Poloni et al. (1997). Egyptians and a few other African populations (Tunisians, Algerians, and even Ethiopians) showed a stronger Y-chromosome similarity to non-African Mediterraneans than to the remainder of Africans mostly from south of the Sahara.


Bosch et al. (1997), using classical genetic markers, calculated Egyptians to be genetically very close to Mediterranean Asians and Europeans. (journal abstract)



Genetics of Ancient Egyptians

Scientists at the University of Cairo tested DNA from the remains of pyramid workers from 2600 BC, and found that the DNA of ancient Egyptians matches that of modern Egyptians. That is, the people living in Egypt now are essentially the same as the people living there thousands of years ago. (Read an excerpt from PBS's Secrets of the Pharaohs)


Borgognini-Tarli and G. Paoli, 1982. The ABO blood type frequencies of ancient Egyptians showed no signs of differing significantly from that of present-day Egyptians. According to the authors, "the blood-group distribution obtained for Asiut, Gebelen and Aswan necropoles shows resemblances with the present leucoderm population of Egypt and particularly with its more 'conservative' fraction (the Copts, MOURANT et al., 1976)."
 

---

Posted by Glider (Member # 12976) on :
 
NO NEED FOR COMMENTS!


 

---

Posted by lamin (Member # 5777) on :
 
So what is the point: Bosnia Serbs and Bosnian Muslims--all of same stock--slaugtered and plundered each other in inexecrable ways during the break-up of Yugoslavia wars.

Iraq Shites and Iraqi Sunnis regularly suicide bomb each other with huge human losses almost daily. The British and Americans firebombed Dresden with huge and horrific casualities at the end of WWII. The Japanese slaughtered and bayonetted hundreds and thousands of women and children during the horrific "Rape of Nankin"--yet assumedly they are all of the same stock.

But back to your claims about "genetic distances" between AEs and others. The concept of "genetic distance" if properly applied should be explained in terms of a "Most Recent Common Ancestor"(MRCA).

As far as the haplogroup data go the haplogroup E3b did not originate in West Asia or Europe--given that it is widespread in East Africa as far south as Tanzania.

For the papers cited to have any validity--according to your thinking--they must state what AE haplogroups are shared in common with the non-African populations cited and they must state how the sharing came about. If it's J and R then that's easily explained by post-pharonic invasions.
 

---

Posted by Glider (Member # 12976) on :
 
NO NEED FOR COMMENTS



 

---

Posted by Glider (Member # 12976) on :
 
A PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS = FEAST YOUR EYES MR CARPETBAGGER.





DONT FORGET TO REPEAT THE MANTRA: ANCIENT EGYPT WAS NOT A BLACK AFRICAN NATION.
 

---

Posted by kenndo (Member # 4846) on :
 
NON-SENSE.
 

---

Posted by Tyrann0saurus (Member # 3735) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ferrous Cranus
THE BLACK CARPETBAGGER TAKES HIS FIRST BATH!

---

The crying person is not black, but a Filipino.
 

---

Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
 
Why can't you understand that black is colour
and Filipino is a nationality thus a Filipino
can be black. Why the hell you think the US
military men called some of them niggers?
Because they were "very dark," that's why.

Anything else is just akin to the true negro
concept designed to limit blackness to a
small select population of Africans.
 

---

Posted by Habari (Member # 14738) on :
 
I think Black from West to East Africa, North to South Africa can be called nigger anywhere in the world...Black skin is "nigger" in some places in the States as far as I know...no "true negro" qualification needed...
 

---

Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
 
You miss the point that black and nigger weren't
terms limited to Africans. From the colonial era
until today the English speaking world relegated
"very dark" skinned people anywhere they found
them to the "nigger" class.

Not only that, in the deleted Polynesian thread
al~Jahiz was quoted listing some Austronesian
speakers as among the blacks. Also the far east
Asians in their own records have a black and
white divide. I know from intimate experience
that Chinese who relocated way down south in
Indonesia say they are the white Chinese.



Thus when a very dark south east Asian denies
being black they are doing so from buy in to
the true negro concept where only the ones
westerner anthropology dubbed "negrito" can
be black. Since Filipines "negritos" were
oppressed by Austronesians, non-"negrito"
Filipinos may bristle at being classed the
same as those whom they've subjected.

Yet at the same time we see our own very dark
Filipino sling contumely on other people who
eschew the black label for similar reasons.
But what's sauce for the goose should be
sauce for the gander except when the chef's
goose is cooked.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ But I'm not a 'Negrito' nor even that dark to be warranted being called black. True, whites have called many dark Filippinos "niggers", but then again they do so to many darker skinned people from Indians to Arabs to even southern Europeans!

So again, your presumtpions about me or my skin complexion (as usual) are wrong. I would show you a picture to prove it, but I don't show my pics in public forums.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
Moving on...

quote:

---

Originally posted by Glider:

OPEN YOUR BLACK RACIST EYES A LITTLE WIDER: AND SMILE!
















REPEAT AFTER ME: ANCIENT EGYPT WAS NOT A BLACK AFRICAN NATION.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Glider:



ANCIENT EGYPT WAS NOT A BLACK NATION! REPEAT A 100 TIMES...SILLY LITTLE BLACK FILIPINO!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug M:

Thutmosis III:



http://www.flickr.com/photos/10647023@N04/2092791257/



http://www.flickr.com/photos/manna4u/518563547/



http://www.flickr.com/photos/manna4u/518563065/in/set-72157600277997973/

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:
You miss the point that black and nigger weren't
terms limited to Africans. From the colonial era
until today the English speaking world relegated
"very dark" skinned people anywhere they found
them to the "nigger" class.

Not only that, in the deleted Polynesian thread
al~Jahiz was quoted listing some Austronesian
speakers as among the blacks. Also the far east
Asians in their own records have a black and
white divide. I know from intimate experience
that Chinese who relocated way down south in
Indonesia say they are the white Chinese.



Thus when a very dark south east Asian denies
being black they are doing so from buy in to
the true negro concept where only the ones
westerner anthropology dubbed "negrito" can
be black. Since Filipines "negritos" were
oppressed by Austronesians, non-"negrito"
Filipinos may bristle at being classed the
same as those whom they've subjected.

Yet at the same time we see our own very dark
Filipino sling contumely on other people who
eschew the black label for similar reasons.
But what's sauce for the goose should be
sauce for the gander except when the chef's
goose is cooked.

---

quote:

---

Glider writes: Your eyes will open a little wider

---

Yours eyes will remain shut, because you can't bear the truth...

Major biological affinities of early southern Egyptians lay with tropical Africans.

The early southern Egyptians belonged primarily to an African descent group which gained some Near Eastern affinity through gene flow with the passage of time. - SOY Keita.

Glider is upset because these modern Egyptians resemble Ancient Egyptians....whereas he does not.

quote:

---

Djehuti writes: Of course the only images Glider can post are Arab Egyptians who deny their black African heritage.

---

^ But they try to claim and Ancient Kemetic [Black] heritage that predates the Arab invasion of Egypt by several thousands of years, yes, what sad losers they are.



The first tribes that inhabited Egypt, that is, the Nile Valley between the Syene cataract and the sea, came from Abyssinia to Sennar. The ancient Egyptians belonged to a race quite similar to the Kennous or Barabras, present inhabitants of Nubia. In the Copts of Egypt, we do not find any of the characteristic features of the ancient Egyptian population. The [delta] Copts are the result of crossbreeding with all the nations that have successively dominated Egypt. It is WRONG to seek in them the principal features of the old race. - Champollion

Champollion is correct, and Glider knows it.
 

---

Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ True enough, but I'm not one of them if that's what you and Takruri think. I'm dark yes, but not that dark and am considred 'brown' by everyone who sees me. I don't know how this topic had to end up about aboriginal Filippinos.

---

I personally wasn't referring to you.
 

---

Posted by Grumman f6f (Member # 14051) on :
 
Djehuti says:
''But I'm not a 'Negrito' nor even that dark to be warranted being called black.''

When a word like ''warranted'' is thrown into the mix this means a distancing of some kind... a negative connotation. This negative is what I see everytime Djehuti gets close to black.

You sced aincha Djehuti.

Would you like to have some of my ''white looks'' to bail you out of this hole you're digging for yourself? I don't travel incognito, I say who I am, I know who I am, and that will be black.

Djehuti talking to AlTakruri:
''So again, your presumtpions about me or my skin complexion (as usual) are wrong.''

So where is the presumption about your skin complexion? You admitted you are dark. But your defensive, distancing attitude comes in when Black African dark is mentioned. Gettin' a little too close for comfort ain't it?

''I would show you a picture to prove it, but I don't show my pics in public forums.''

What did the psychiatrist say when you told him that?
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ LOL Sorry Grumman but I don't suffer from any neurosis as you apparently do. I'm not in denial about being black because I'm not black. I don't know why you and a few others in here seem to be obsessed in claiming me as such.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug M:
Absolutely. The reason whites used racist slurs against many Filipinos was because many Filipinos were indeed dark and it was not just the Negritoes. Dark skinned people with so-called "Asian" features are just as aboriginal to South and South East Asia as the so-called Negrito type...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

quote:

---

Glider writes: Your eyes will open a little wider

---

Yours eyes will remain shut, because you can't bear the truth...

Major biological affinities of early southern Egyptians lay with tropical Africans.

The early southern Egyptians belonged primarily to an African descent group which gained some Near Eastern affinity through gene flow with the passage of time. - SOY Keita.

Glider is upset because these modern Egyptians resemble Ancient Egyptians....whereas he does not.

quote:

---

Djehuti writes: Of course the only images Glider can post are Arab Egyptians who deny their black African heritage.

---

^ But they try to claim and Ancient Kemetic [Black] heritage that predates the Arab invasion of Egypt by several thousands of years, yes, what sad losers they are.



The first tribes that inhabited Egypt, that is, the Nile Valley between the Syene cataract and the sea, came from Abyssinia to Sennar. The ancient Egyptians belonged to a race quite similar to the Kennous or Barabras, present inhabitants of Nubia. In the Copts of Egypt, we do not find any of the characteristic features of the ancient Egyptian population. The [delta] Copts are the result of crossbreeding with all the nations that have successively dominated Egypt. It is WRONG to seek in them the principal features of the old race. - Champollion

Champollion is correct, and Glider knows it.

---

He knows it but denies it and keeps up his futile fight because that's the type of person he is.
 

---

Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
 
Hmm, you've gone from an originally self-proclaimed
"very dark" to a now denying it "nor even that dark."

After seeing PR's mug lord knows I don't want to
see yours. And thanks for proving exactly what I
guessed at. BTW whites ain't never called nobody
a nigger that wasn't black. Southern Europeans
aren't called black or nigger but southern Arabs
the majority of Indians and certain southeast
Asians were once quite readily called black and
nigger until they were needed as "population
allies" by whites or buffers against African
black headcount where pluralities exist or
appear about to arise.

I don't ever want to read you again defining who
is black or that blacks come in wide facial and
hair type varieties as long you call others black
but deny that many Austronesians who are very
dark aren't black because of facial features or
hair.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander
unless it's the chef's goose that getting cooked.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ But I'm not a 'Negrito' nor even that dark to be warranted being called black. True, whites have called many dark Filippinos "niggers", but then again they do so to many darker skinned people from Indians to Arabs to even southern Europeans!

So again, your presumtpions about me or my skin complexion (as usual) are wrong. I would show you a picture to prove it, but I don't show my pics in public forums.

---

quote:

---

But among the blacks are counted
...
the people of
* Sind
* the Hindus
* the Qamar
* the Dabila
* the IndoChinese
and those beyond them.

The sea is more extensive than the land, and the islands in the
sea between IndoChina and Zanzibar are full of blacks, like the
* Sarandib
* Kalah
* Amal
* Zabij and its islands up to Hindustan and IndoChina
* Kabul and those coasts.


"They said, 'The Arabs come from us -- not from the whites
-- because of the similarity of their colour to ours. The
Hindus are more yellow in color than the Arabs, yet they
are counted among the black peoples."


Abu Uthman Amr ibn Bahr al-Jahiz
Kitab Fakhr as-Sudan 'Ala al-Bidan
Baghdad: self-published, 815 C.E.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SidiRom er DJ er SidiRom er ???:

I do not consider people Black just because they are dark skinned ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by DJ:

Then what do you consider black then?? 'Black' referred solely to color and complexion and there are a great many populations outside of Africa who share the same complexion as black Africans. Which is why they were called black in the first place.

---

Thoom thoom thoom ... boom. Fork tongue, him speak with fork tongue.
Fork tongue, him speak with fork tongue. Thoom thoom thoom ... boom.


What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander
unless it's the chef's goose what's gittin' cooked.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ I fail to see how I see how spoke with a "forked tongue". I did not contradict myself at all. Yes there are people in the world with the same complexions as Africans but I am not one of them and neither are many (though not all) Filippinos. And?

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:

Hmm, you've gone from an originally self-proclaimed
"very dark" to a now denying it "nor even that dark."

---

quote:

---

After seeing PR's mug lord knows I don't want to see yours. And thanks for proving exactly what I guessed at. BTW whites ain't never called nobody a nigger that wasn't black. Southern Europeans aren't called black or nigger but southern Arabs the majority of Indians and certain southeast Asians were once quite readily called black and nigger until they were needed as "population allies" by whites or buffers against African black headcount where pluralities exist or appear about to arise.

---

quote:

---

I don't ever want to read you again defining who is black or that blacks come in wide facial and hair type varieties as long as you call others black but deny that many Austronesians who are very dark aren't black because of facial features or hair.

---

quote:

---

What's good for the goose is good for the gander unless it's the chef's goose that getting cooked.

---

Okay. LOL But I never double-talked and what I said still stands-- I'm not black.

If this bothers you, then I'm sorry.
 

---

Posted by Grumman f6f (Member # 14051) on :
 
Then why are you railing against Glider and his claims?
 

---

Posted by Habari (Member # 14738) on :
 
The majority of Filipinos are not dark enough to be viewed as "Black" even by Asian standard...I believe Djehuti because I know a lot of Filipinos...the majority don't look black by any standard...
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ Habari, I think all the educated people here including Takruri know that but want to create a fuss anyone perhaps because of the same syndrome Marc Washington has in claiming alot of people as 'black'.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Grumman f6f:

Then why are you railing against Glider and his claims?

---

quote:

---

The
Hindus are more yellow in color than the Arabs, yet they
are counted among the black peoples."


Abu Uthman Amr ibn Bahr al-Jahiz

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:

DJ nobody could give PR a run for his money in
the looks department. Some of what I'm roasting
you over is tongue and cheek but denying some
non-"negrito" Filipinos are black is something
that I'm not joking about. You calling yourself
"very dark" is just a euphemism for black to me
because I put it in on the scale right next to flat black. Perhaps if you qualified by comparison of some natural item like coffe chocolate caramel etc I'd know just what you mean. Yet and still.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug M:

When I say Asian looking I mean with features similar to other populations found in Asia who are light skinned. The point being that some people believe that certain features associated with asians developed AFTER the arrival of the Negrito populations, with the later features being associated with light skin. My argument is that Negrito populations are just ONE TYPE of the darker skinned aboriginal populations that have been in Asia for the last 30,000 years and the remains of the aboriginal black non negrito Asian types can be found in some of the more remote pacific Islands not decimated by foreign contact.

---

quote:

---

But indeed this is off topic and dare I say maybe we should re-create that pacific/asian ancestry thread?

---

You might as well, because not only do I find it annoying that we are getting off-topic again about the same Pacific ancestry mess involving ME, but even more infuriated that it stemmed from the remarks of a troll.

By the way, strangely I've noticed some of the deleted threads can still be viewed on google. Maybe you can find it there.
 

---

Posted by Grumman f6f (Member # 14051) on :
 
''but even more infuriated that it stemmed from the remarks of a troll.''

Trolling when used by a fisherman is called a good thing. They get positive results. In this case trolling isn't a bad deal. It's just a way to find out answers... which are increasingly elusive.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ That may be, but off-topic distractions are just that. In the meantime the troll is probably having a good time watching you guys squable about trying to claim me as black or not while momentarily taking a break from the REALITY of his nonsense.
 

---

Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
 
Well nobody else fails to see how. It can't be one
way for everybody else "... what do you consider black
then?? 'Black' referred solely to color and complexion and
there are a great many populations outside of Africa who share
the same complexion as black Africans. Which is why they were
called black in the first place." and another way for you "very
dark but not black." Else you speak with fork tongue.

Do you have enough intelligence to use those skin colour bricks
you once posted or name the natural item that's your shade of "very
dark but not black" (2nd request not to be distracted from or overlooked).

Your "very dark but not black" sounds just like "black
but not negro." In fact there is no difference at all.

As al~Jahiz said (and I'll always adhere to his
view) even hi yalla Hindus are counted as black.
I guess very dark is lighter than yalla, right?
And you say they call you spic not gook?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ I fail to see how I see how spoke with a "forked tongue". I did not contradict myself at all. Yes there are people in the world with the same complexions as Africans but I am not one of them and neither are many (though not all) Filippinos. And?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
Okay, and again how dark or even very dark is a matter of relation. Just because someone is very dark does not necessarily mean mean black as it depends on relation to what and I just explained what that relation was to.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug M:

When I say Asian looking I mean with features similar to other populations found in Asia who are light skinned. The point being that some people believe that certain features associated with asians developed AFTER the arrival of the Negrito populations, with the later features being associated with light skin. My argument is that Negrito populations are just ONE TYPE of the darker skinned aboriginal populations that have been in Asia for the last 30,000 years and the remains of the aboriginal black non negrito Asian types can be found in some of the more remote pacific Islands not decimated by foreign contact.

---

That depends on what features you mean. There are many features that were possessed by blacks first and foremost before lighter-skinned types evolved.

However, I hope you aren't making a division between fair-skinned East Asians and darker ones such as myself to differences in overall ancestry as such differences are just as much due to simple variance as differences in complexion between black populations.

quote:

---

But indeed this is off topic and dare I say maybe we should re-create that pacific/asian ancestry thread?

---

You might as well, because not only do I find it annoying that we are getting off-topic again about the same Pacific ancestry mess involving ME, but even more infuriated that it stemmed from the remarks of a troll.

By the way, strangely I've noticed some of the deleted threads can still be viewed on google. Maybe you can find it there.

---

quote:

---

Human genetic diversity in the Pacific has not been adequately sampled, particularly in Melanesia. As a result, population relationships there have been open to debate. A genome scan of autosomal markers (687 microsatellites and 203 insertions/deletions) on 952 individuals from 41 Pacific populations now provides the basis for understanding the remarkable nature of Melanesian variation, and for a more accurate comparison of these Pacific populations with previously studied groups from other regions. It also shows how textured human population variation can be in particular circumstances. Genetic diversity within individual Pacific populations is shown to be very low, while differentiation among Melanesian groups is high. Melanesian differentiation varies not only between islands, but also by island size and topographical complexity. The greatest distinctions are among the isolated groups in large island interiors, which are also the most internally homogeneous. The pattern loosely tracks language distinctions. Papuan-speaking groups are the most differentiated, and Austronesian or Oceanic-speaking groups, which tend to live along the coastlines, are more intermixed. A small “Austronesian” genetic signature (always <20%) was detected in less than half the Melanesian groups that speak Austronesian languages, and is entirely lacking in Papuan-speaking groups. Although the Polynesians are also distinctive, they tend to cluster with Micronesians, Taiwan Aborigines, and East Asians, and not Melanesians. These findings contribute to a resolution to the debates over Polynesian origins and their past interactions with Melanesians. With regard to genetics, the earlier studies had heavily relied on the evidence from single locus mitochondrial DNA or Y chromosome variation. Neither of these provided an unequivocal signal of phylogenetic relations or population intermixture proportions in the Pacific. Our analysis indicates the ancestors of Polynesians moved through Melanesia relatively rapidly and only intermixed to a very modest degree with the indigenous populations there.

---

From: http://genetics.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371%2Fjournal.pgen.0040019&ct=1

These are the same people claiming that Pacific Islanders are different genetically from Melanesians. However, on the basis of what I have seen, the similarity in culture, custom and features from between Papua New Guinea and the pacific islands, makes the idea that these people are the result of a DIFFERENT migration from Asia that WENT AROUND the aboriginal populations of Melanesia, Australia and New Guinea more and more ridiculous every day. It sounds like they are trying to pull another Egypt versus Nubia trick in the pacific. In fact I know they are with all the white mainland Asian looking women European producers keep promoting as Miss Polynesia and Miss South Pacific and what not in .

Vintage images of Polynesia:

http://www.oceania-ethnographica.com/polynesia.html



From: http://www.janeresture.com/tahiti_postcards18/index.htm

Interesting videos about Tahitian culture:

http://dl.filmaust.com.au/module/236/

http://dl.filmaust.com.au/module/235/
 

---

Posted by Alive-(What Box) (Member # 10819) on :
 
When it comes to Filipinos in general, I can see soemone considering them black, and likewise I can see someone considering them non-black.

Those two quotes are a very contradicting pair of quotes, however.
 

---

Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
 
Modern Filipinos just like modern people in many places throughout South East Asia and the Pacific, have mixed ancestries. The point being made is that even 100 years ago, there were many black natives on the islands of the Philippines, both Negrito and non Negrito. The best non contradictory way of putting it is that some Philippine people are black and some aren't.
 

---

Posted by lamin (Member # 5777) on :
 
Doug,

Have humans been in Asia for 90,000 years? The consensus of those who study the OOA thesis claim that the earliest that modern humans left Africa was some 50,000 years ago. Has there been a recent revision?
 

---

Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
 
Oppenheimer posits a 85Kya-75Kya range for beachcombers
leaving Africa to arrive at SE Asia and S China "destinations."
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:

Well nobody else fails to see how. It can't be one
way for everybody else "... what do you consider black
then?? 'Black' referred solely to color and complexion and
there are a great many populations outside of Africa who share
the same complexion as black Africans. Which is why they were
called black in the first place." and another way for you "very
dark but not black." Else you speak with fork tongue.

---

quote:

---

“I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but
I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.”

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug M:

I pretty much meant what I said. ALL features found in Asian populations started out FIRST among blacks. Slanted eyes, straight hair, high cheeks, thin lips and so forth were found first among black populations even prior to the development of white skin. White skin is 20,000 years old. Humans have been in Asia for 90,000. It stands to reason that those black populations certainly began to develop natural variations in features in various parts of Asia between 90,000 and 20,000 years ago. It isn't like these populations stayed homogenous for 70,000 years and then suddenly started developing a large amount of varied traits within the last 20,000 years. The range of diversity seen in early populations in Asia can best be seen between Australia and New Guinea and the Islands therebouts. The Solomon islands have been said to have the highest amount of diversity genetically and in features of almost any place on earth. They are ALL black. Remember, as you go back towards Africa in the time line of humanity, the MORE diversity you will find.

---

quote:

---

Human genetic diversity in the Pacific has not been adequately sampled, particularly in Melanesia. As a result, population relationships there have been open to debate. A genome scan of autosomal markers (687 microsatellites and 203 insertions/deletions) on 952 individuals from 41 Pacific populations now provides the basis for understanding the remarkable nature of Melanesian variation, and for a more accurate comparison of these Pacific populations with previously studied groups from other regions. It also shows how textured human population variation can be in particular circumstances. Genetic diversity within individual Pacific populations is shown to be very low, while differentiation among Melanesian groups is high. Melanesian differentiation varies not only between islands, but also by island size and topographical complexity. The greatest distinctions are among the isolated groups in large island interiors, which are also the most internally homogeneous. The pattern loosely tracks language distinctions. Papuan-speaking groups are the most differentiated, and Austronesian or Oceanic-speaking groups, which tend to live along the coastlines, are more intermixed. A small “Austronesian” genetic signature (always <20%) was detected in less than half the Melanesian groups that speak Austronesian languages, and is entirely lacking in Papuan-speaking groups. Although the Polynesians are also distinctive, they tend to cluster with Micronesians, Taiwan Aborigines, and East Asians, and not Melanesians. These findings contribute to a resolution to the debates over Polynesian origins and their past interactions with Melanesians. With regard to genetics, the earlier studies had heavily relied on the evidence from single locus mitochondrial DNA or Y chromosome variation. Neither of these provided an unequivocal signal of phylogenetic relations or population intermixture proportions in the Pacific. Our analysis indicates the ancestors of Polynesians moved through Melanesia relatively rapidly and only intermixed to a very modest degree with the indigenous populations there.

From: http://genetics.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371%2Fjournal.pgen.0040019&ct=1

These are the same people claiming that Pacific Islanders are different genetically from Melanesians. However, on the basis of what I have seen, the similarity in culture, custom and features from between Papua New Guinea and the pacific islands, makes the idea that these people are the result of a DIFFERENT migration from Asia that WENT AROUND the aboriginal populations of Melanesia, Australia and New Guinea more and more ridiculous every day. It sounds like they are trying to pull another Egypt versus Nubia trick in the pacific. In fact I know they are with all the white mainland Asian looking women European producers keep promoting as Miss Polynesia and Miss South Pacific and what not in .

Vintage images of Polynesia:

http://www.oceania-ethnographica.com/polynesia.html



From: http://www.janeresture.com/tahiti_postcards18/index.htm

Interesting videos about Tahitian culture:

http://dl.filmaust.com.au/module/236/

http://dl.filmaust.com.au/module/235/

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alive-(What Box):

When it comes to Filipinos in general, I can see soemone considering them black, and likewise I can see someone considering them non-black.

Those two quotes are a very contradicting pair of quotes, however.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug M:

Modern Filipinos just like modern people in many places throughout South East Asia and the Pacific, have mixed ancestries. The point being made is that even 100 years ago, there were many black natives on the islands of the Philippines, both Negrito and non Negrito. The best non contradictory way of putting it is that some Philippine people are black and some aren't.

---

Okay and isn't that what I've been saying all along?? Perhaps someone else should try telling you know who that I am among those that are non-black.

I believe this thread has been corrupted enough by off-topic nonsense.

The original purpose of this thread was lost when the troll who answered began calling me a "black Filipino" unfortunately some of you gullible foolish fish bit the bait and let the troll free to watch you squabble over what color I am.
 

---

Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
 
Now you compound the issue by implying that being
assumed an Hispanic (and yes I saw Filipinos listed
as such on a Hispanic History week/month poster) is
proof of not being black. Unbelieveable!?!

Dance dance dance still no example by comparison
of what color very dark but not black (aka black
but not negro) is supposed to be. And remember Mr.
DJ it was no one but you who expressed the trivial
matter of your (still too ashamed to describe because
everyone will then see it surely falls within the range
attributed to blacks by ancient medieval or modern standards) complexion.

So you know nobody gave a care what your colour is.
You decided to write about it and thus make it a fair,
ehem, very dark / not even that dark -- choose one --,
target for discussion to clarify just what in the world
could you possibly mean that very dark isn't black because
I just can't figure that one out.

So describe very dark by the skin colour brick number
or by comparison to a natural object or just don't bother
to reply at all and never again chastise any people
for rejecting the black label the same as you do.
 

---

Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
 
And what happened to the pic of that hunched over
old Asian man that DJ said wasn't black in colour
because said man was Asian (as if continent negates
colour)?

I want someone to tell me why that man's colour isn't black.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:

Now you compound the issue by implying that being
assumed an Hispanic (and yes I saw Filipinos listed
as such on a Hispanic History week/month poster) is
proof of not being black. Unbelieveable!?!

Dance dance dance still no example by comparison
of what color very dark but not black (aka black
but not negro) is supposed to be. And remember Mr.
DJ it was no one but you who expressed the trivial
matter of your (still too ashamed to describe because
everyone will then see it surely falls within the range
attributed to blacks by ancient medieval or modern standards) complexion.

So you know nobody gave a care what your colour is.
You decided to write about it and thus make it a fair,
ehem, very dark / not even that dark -- choose one --,
target for discussion to clarify just what in the world
could you possibly mean that very dark isn't black because
I just can't figure that one out.

So describe very dark by the skin colour brick number
or by comparison to a natural object or just don't bother
to reply at all and never again chastise any people
for rejecting the black label the same as you do.

---

quote:

---

And what happened to the pic of that hunched over
old Asian man that DJ said wasn't black in colour
because said man was Asian (as if continent negates
colour)?

I want someone to tell me why that man's colour isn't black.

---