Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
I vote for the reconstruction done by the British Science Museum
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
: 
http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/antenna/tutankhamun/index.asp
quote:right, I have deleted reference to channel 4
Originally posted by tropicals redacted:
^2013 Channel4 programme which doesn't appear to have anything to do whatsoever with the BBC's:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04n6scp
quote:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/king-tut-s-mysterious-death-finally-solved-film-says-1.2355828
But a "virtual autopsy" conducted by Egyptologist Chris Naunton, director of the London-based Egypt Exploration Society,
quote:plsease explain how the hip bone would relate to skin color
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
It's pretty obvious that you can't get skin color from a skeleton. The relative size of the hip bone is as far you can go with a skeleton.
quote:It doesn't. That's my point.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:plsease explain how the hip bone would relate to skin color
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
It's pretty obvious that you can't get skin color from a skeleton. The relative size of the hip bone is as far you can go with a skeleton.
quote:Not an exact shade, but limb lengths and cranial morphology can help you intuit what would be a more reasonable range.
It's pretty obvious that you can't get skin color from a skeleton.
quote:I think that's their objective.
Looks very modern Egyptian IMO
: 
quote:Actually the above reconstruction was commisioned by British scientists but was actually done by U.S. scientists who were double-blinded (they had no idea whose skull cast they were working with). Their results were then aired on the 2005 Discovery Channel program 'Who Killed King Tut'.
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
I vote for the reconstruction done by the British Science Museum
http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/antenna/tutankhamun/index.asp
quote:^^This guy routinely defines "black" and "white" as referring to skin color only.
Originally posted by Djehuti:
It's funny. The only thing 'white' about this reconstruction is the complexion, yet one can look at the features of the face and see it is rather very un-European looking.
quote:I think a better example would be this boy from rural Luxor (where Tut's family is from)
Originally posted by beyoku:
Looks like
quote:I haven't seen the Discovery Channel Program - it's interesting that they specifically said that the skull belonged to someone of African descent. From memory, Susan Anton also mentioned this in her e-mail to an ES member regarding the 2006 Tut model.
Actually the above reconstruction was commisioned by British scientists but was actually done by U.S. scientists who were double-blinded (they had no idea whose skull cast they were working with). Their results were then aired on the 2005 Discovery Channel program 'Who Killed King Tut'.
What makes the above reconstruction unique is that I believe it was the ONLY one done by scientists who were double-blinded and therefore unbiased. Their conclusions were that the skull belonged to someone of African descent though I still think they were biased in that they gave him a wider nose tip under the stereotype that Africans have wide noses.
quote:That's amazing.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:- From The Oxford Encyclopedia of African Thought, Volume 1 (2010)
As a consequence the many invasions of ancient Egypt, the population has changed over the years. There were Hyksos (Heka Khasut) from Asia, who melted into the Delta Region around 1500 B.C.E., and then a series of invasions by the Assyrians, Persians and Greeks. With the arrival of large groups of Arabians in the seventh century C.E., the racial character of Egypt began to change.
The resultant mixtures of Africans, Arabs, Greeks and Persians were to be jointed with Turks, Russians, Albanians, British, and French to create a different population that there had been during the ancient times.
One cannot say that today's Egypt is the same as the Egypt of antiquity anymore than one can say that today's North America is the same as it was 5000 years ago.
quote:- From A Brief History of Egypt by Jr. Goldschmidt Arthur (2007)
With the passage of time, each wave of new immigrants has assimilated into the local mix of peoples , making modern Egypt a combination of Libyans, Nubians, Syrians, Persians, Macedonians, Romans, Arabs, Turks, Circassians, Greeks, Italians, and Armenians, along with the descendants of the people of ancient Egypt.
quote:from Ethnicity (Riggs, 2012) see above/original post for more
- Alexander the Great’s conquest of Egypt, in 332 BCE, precipitated a period of mass immigration .
quote:from A Companion to Ancient History Edited by Andrew Erskine (2009)
The Late Period is often singled out as the time when mass immigration into Egypt altered the character of the country
quote:from A History of Egypt: From Earliest Times to the Present by Jason Thompson (2009)
The Muslim conquerors did not attempt a mass conversion of Christianity to Islam, if only because that would have reduced the taxes non-Muslims were compelled to pay, but a number of other factors were at work. Arab men could marry Christian women and their children would become Muslim. Large-scale Arab immigration into Egypt began during the eighth century.
quote:Yes, and King Tut falls within this larger scale immigration/invasion period, so too does Ramesses the Great, who was reddish haired.
CHANGE IN THE ETHNIC COMPOSITION OF MODERN EGYPT:
We all know in terms of ethnic composition, modern Egypt, is much different from Ancient Egypt.
Contemporary Egypt, is mostly an ethnic admixture between foreign invaders and conquerors and indigenous African people. Autosomally, as a whole, they tend to cluster more with Eurasian especially the Middle East. In the south, populations like Nubians probably cluster more with Africans. All this is because of massive immigration from Europe and western Asia which started already in dynastic time, culminating in the Hyksos (Aamu) foreign rule during the second intermediate period, as well as during the late periods up to now (Assyrians, Greeks, Romans, Macedonians, Arab conquest, British colonization, etc).
quote:They probably had some non-African ancestry, but they were mostly black African as genetic shows.
Originally posted by Gor:
quote:Yes, and King Tut falls within this larger scale immigration/invasion period, so too does Ramesses the Great, who was reddish haired.
CHANGE IN THE ETHNIC COMPOSITION OF MODERN EGYPT:
We all know in terms of ethnic composition, modern Egypt, is much different from Ancient Egypt.
Contemporary Egypt, is mostly an ethnic admixture between foreign invaders and conquerors and indigenous African people. Autosomally, as a whole, they tend to cluster more with Eurasian especially the Middle East. In the south, populations like Nubians probably cluster more with Africans. All this is because of massive immigration from Europe and western Asia which started already in dynastic time, culminating in the Hyksos (Aamu) foreign rule during the second intermediate period, as well as during the late periods up to now (Assyrians, Greeks, Romans, Macedonians, Arab conquest, British colonization, etc).
So why is it 'white supremacy' to claim these individuals may have had non-African ancestry?
quote:The Hyksos took over part of Egypt around 1640 B.C. for about 100 years.
Originally posted by Gor:
quote:Yes, and King Tut falls within this larger scale immigration/invasion period, so too does Ramesses the Great, who was reddish haired.
CHANGE IN THE ETHNIC COMPOSITION OF MODERN EGYPT:
We all know in terms of ethnic composition, modern Egypt, is much different from Ancient Egypt.
Contemporary Egypt, is mostly an ethnic admixture between foreign invaders and conquerors and indigenous African people. Autosomally, as a whole, they tend to cluster more with Eurasian especially the Middle East. In the south, populations like Nubians probably cluster more with Africans. All this is because of massive immigration from Europe and western Asia which started already in dynastic time, culminating in the Hyksos (Aamu) foreign rule during the second intermediate period, as well as during the late periods up to now (Assyrians, Greeks, Romans, Macedonians, Arab conquest, British colonization, etc).
So why is it 'white supremacy' to claim these individuals may have had non-African ancestry?
quote:
DNA results identified alleles
that today are most frequent in Sub-Saharan Africa and found in Middle Eastern populations at lower frequencies. This suggests a Sub-Saharan African genetic component for the Amarna Period royal family, but does not exclude the possibility of additional ancestral components for those ancient individuals
quote:
What are these genetic studies? Genotype frequencies for a small number of cherry-picked alleles? The non-peer reviewed study referenced above only sequenced 8 loci to find 2 alleles much more frequent in populations of Africa than in other parts of the world (D18S51 and D21S11). So what? You can easily find certain alleles more common in Siberia or Northern Europe.
quote:Take a look here:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
The Hyksos took over part of Egypt around 1640 B.C. for about 100 years.
Tutankhamun's reign started 400 years later 1332 BC but prior to the late period invasions beginning much later with the Assyrians in 671 BC.
Therefore those later nvasions are irrelevant to Tutankhmun
There is no historical evidence Tutankhamun was of Hyksos descent or partial Hyksos descent. [/QB]
quote:1) That doesn't prove Tutankhmun was related to the Hyksos or tha the average Egyptian had Hyksos admixture
Originally posted by Gor:
quote:Take a look here:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
The Hyksos took over part of Egypt around 1640 B.C. for about 100 years.
Tutankhamun's reign started 400 years later 1332 BC but prior to the late period invasions beginning much later with the Assyrians in 671 BC.
Therefore those later nvasions are irrelevant to Tutankhmun
There is no historical evidence Tutankhamun was of Hyksos descent or partial Hyksos descent.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyksos
"Even before the [Hyksos] migration, Amenemhat III carried out extensive building works and mining, and Gae Callender notes that "the large intake of Asiatics, which seems to have occurred partly in order to subsidize the extensive building work, may have encouraged the so-called Hyksos to settle in the Delta, thus leading eventually to the collapse of native Egyptian rule." - Callender, Gae, "The Middle Kingdom Renaissance," in Ian Shaw, ed. The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt, Oxford University Press, 2003. p. 157.
It looks like a couple of centuries before the Hyksos invasion, large numbers of Asiatics had already settled into the north-eastern Nile Delta region. [/QB]
quote:
Originally posted by Gor:
There is no recorded African population with a mean brachycephalic CI index, it would also be very rare to find a living African individual with Tut's CI (83.9).
quote:
Originally posted by Gor:
KV55's post-cranial measurements have been known for some time:
"If the brachial (radio-humeral) and crural (tibio-femoral) indices are calculated for these remains, they are found to measure 75.1 and 82.6 respectively. These values, and the lengths of the humerus and femur, agree very closely with data presented for male American whites by Krogman in 1955." (Harrison, 1966) [/QB]
quote:If there is good evidence against what I post i will retract my claim. I will do so here.
Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus:
^^^I don't know why Eurocentrics always overlook that? Good point.
quote:Harris 1991 and Hussein
The most heterogeneous grouping was that
of the XVIII dynasty. What all of these mummies
have in common is a tong head or cranium
(dolichocephalic) and a relatively delicate face,
compared with the mummies of the XIX and XX
dynasties and Old Kingdom mummies that our group
has examined.
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
,okay i will wait for you to play catch up,after making this last post,
quote:Why would the Hyksos be bantu specifcially?
Originally posted by LEDAMA:
i am talking about these black bantu canaanites that entered egypt as hyksos.
Both hyksos(bantus) and SEA-PEOPLE(Amhara hittites)were black people.
i made my point see you after two years.probably by then truth will be out.
quote:But then, rather unfortunately, added:
Based on the physical characters of the skull, I concluded that this was the skull of a male older than 15 but less than 21, and likely in the 18-20 year range and of African ancestry
quote:Huh??
possibly north african. The possibly
north african came mostly from the shape of the face including the narrow nose opening, that is not entirely consistent with an 'African'
designation.
quote:But again:
Tut's head was a
bit of a conundrum, but, as you note, there is a huge range of variation in modern humans from any area, so for me the skull overall, including
aspects of the face, spoke fairly strongly of his African origins
quote:Then, with reference to skin tone, which was apparently based on a modern Egyptian average:
- the nose was a bit unusual.
quote:That's quite strange given that Keita quote:
I think,however, it would have been as accurate to have had the same facial
reconstruction with either a lighter tone or a darker tone to the skin.
quote:
the skull overall, including aspects of the face spoke fairly strongly of his African origins
quote:By 'African' I presume they mean Sub-Saharan (since they are contrasting to North-African).
Originally posted by tropicals redacted:
So when Anton used the term 'African' (making the distinction with 'North African' based on his nose)what do you think she meant?
What do you think she's trying to get across with use of the term 'African'?
quote:Following on from Anton's conclusion that "the skull overall, including aspects of the face spoke fairly strongly of his African origins", what do you think ideas of a white/Caucasian Tutankhamun are rooted in?
This divide is no more real though than putting them together. The idea of them together is rooted in political Pan-Africanism, which mostly seems to come from African-American posters (most the crowd at ES-reloaded) with serious issues. This even shows sometimes in Keita with his "Africanoid" agenda.
quote:Which limb studies state that Ramses II does not match with other Africans? Also in your link the argument they suggest is that Ramses like other Egyptians(and Africans) dyed his hair red via henna. But more importantly Ramses having natural red hair has been debunked numerous times. But more importantly a widely known X-Ray study done on both 19th Dynasty(Ramses II dynasty) and 20th Dynasty:
Originally posted by Gor:
quote:If there is good evidence against what I post i will retract my claim. I will do so here.
Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus:
^^^I don't know why Eurocentrics always overlook that? Good point.
Looking at the limb study abstract, it says Ramesses II doesn't match the others, furthermore he was reddish haired, so what about this?
Redheaded Pharaoh Ramesses II
http://marchofthetitans.com/earlson/rameses.htm
quote:James Harris from Edward Wente, X-ray Atlas of the Royal Mummies (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1980)
The XVIV Dynasty is higher in ANB and SN-M Plane than the XX Dynasty. Ramesses IV is the only one in these two dynasties with strong alveolar prognathism, at least, as indicated by SNA. However, dental alveolar prognathism is quite common in both dynasties. Also, both have ANB and SN- M Plane at mean angles higher than even African Americans.
In terms of head shape, the XVIV and XX dynasties look more like the early Nubian skulls from the mesolithic with low vaults and sloping, curved foreheads. The XVII and XVIII dynasty skulls are shaped more like modern Nubians with globular skulls and high vaults. Merenptah, Siptah and Ramesses V all have pronounced glabellae. Ramesses IV has a bulging occiput similar to the "Elder Lady." Ramesses II and his son, Merenptah, both have rather weakly inclined mandibles with long ramus. Ramesses II's father, Seti I, does not possess this feature, though, suggesting that this was inherited from Ramesses II's mother, Queen Mut-Tuy. The gonial angle of Seti I is 116.3 compared to 107.9 and 109 for Ramesses II and Merenptah respectively.
The XVIV and XX dynasty heads do not have steep foreheads, receding zygomatic arches or prominent chins. Generally, both glabella and occiput are rounded and projecting to varying degrees. The sagittal contour is usually flattened, at least to some degree, although this sometimes begins before the bregma rather than in post-bregmatic position. The whole mandible is rarely squarish, although the body sometimes has a wavy edge. The latter feature, though, is very common in both ancient and modern Nubians. According to Gill (1986), an undulating mandible is a characteristic of Negroids.
The difference between late XVII and XVIII dynasty royal mummies and contemporary Nubians is slight. During the XVIV and XX dynasties we see possibly some mixing between a Nubian element that is more similar to Mesolithic Nubians (low vaults, sloping frontal bone, etc.), with an orthognathous population. Since the Ramessides were of northern extraction, this could represent miscegenation with modern Mediterraneans of Levantine type. The projecting zygomatic arches of Seti I suggest remnants of the old Natufian/Tasian types of the Holocene period.
If the heads of Queens Nodjme and Esemkhebe are any indication, there may have been a new influx of southern blood during the XXI Dynasty.
In summation, the New Kingdom Pharaohs and Queens whose mummies have been recovered bear strong similarity to either contemporary Nubians, as with the XVII and XVIII dynasties, or with Mesolithic-Holocene Nubians, as with the XVIV and XX dynasties. The former dynasties seem to have a strong southern affinity, while the latter possessed evidence of mixing with modern Mediterranean types and also, possibly, with remnants of the old Tasian and Natufian populations. From the few sample available from the XXI Dynasty, there may have been a new infusion from the south at this period.
quote:Letter from Cairo
SOME GENETIC FEATURES OF ANCIENT EGYPTIANS
As part of research conducted by the Cairo University in collaboration
with the Higher Council of Antiquities, it has been possible to achieve the
anthropological characteristics of the Pharaohs.
According to preliminary indications, we reached a number of traits of the
Pharaohs. It was possible to identify genes for size, color and eye color and
hair of the king in the Pharaonic era in which samples were collected. They
were placed on mummies in sarcophagi. A group of researchers has been
able to separate those genes that have proven that the ancient Egyptians
were not taller as previously thought. Their size was rather average, with
the exception of Ramses II, whose analysis of genes has proven to be cut.
It has also been demonstrated that his skin was brown and his hair was black,
not red. The color red has been found on his mummy is due to a dye (probably henna).
His eyes were black with a slight tinge of brown.
Amenhotep III was short of stature, the color of his skin was a light brown.
His eyes and his hair was black dark. These features show that the kings were
related. All the kings at that time had a common origin in the family tree of the
royal family. It is possible to determine a precise dates and times in the future.
This research will confirm certain anthropological traits that have been studied
before on the Pharaonic mummies. This will give preliminary indications about
the traits, diseases and characteristics of the Pharaohs.
quote:the orignal in French
Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus:
[QB] @Gor
Further evidence that dismiss Ramses having natural red hair(which the gene would not had been suitable for such environment), but instead dyed it red:
[QUOTE]SOME GENETIC FEATURES OF ANCIENT EGYPTIANS
As part of research conducted by the Cairo University in collaboration
with the Higher Council of Antiquities, it has been possible to achieve the
anthropological characteristics of the Pharaohs.
quote:English:
http://www.radiocemac.com/index.php/Culture-/Culture/Ramses-2-lafricain-la-verite-par-les-tests-genetiques.html
La lettre du Caire
No. 58 Du 25 /4 Au 1er / 5/ 2000
CERTAINS TRAITS GENETIQUES DES EGYPTIENS ANCIENS
Dans le cadre des recherches effectuées par l’Université du Caire en collaboration avec le Conseil Supérieur des Antiquités, il a été possible de parvenir aux caractéristiques anthropologiques des Pharaons.
Selon les indices préliminaires, on est parvenu à un certain nombre de traits génétiques des Pharaons. Il a été possible de déterminer les gènes de la taille, de la couleur de la peau et de la couleur des yeux et des cheveux du roi à l’époque pharaonique dont des échantillons ont été prélevés.
quote:Robins and Shute, 1983: "It is shown that the limbs of the pharaohs, like those of other Ancient Egyptians, had negroid characteristics, in that the distal segments were relatively long in comparison with the proximal segments. An exception was Ramesses II, who appears to have had short legs below the knees."
Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus:
Which limb studies state that Ramses II does not match with other Africans?
quote:I'll explain -
Following on from Anton's conclusion that "the skull overall, including aspects of the face spoke fairly strongly of his African origins", what do you think ideas of a white/Caucasian Tutankhamun are rooted in?
quote:So the question remains, what do you think ideas of a white/Caucasian Tutankhamun are rooted in?
They would be instead the "elongated" African morph which Hierneux described, perhaps with some Saharan differences (see Krantz). But we don't have their pigmentation (although it can be inferred by latitude ).
quote:The fact the "elongated" African morph is visually perceived by many as Caucasoid, or at least part Caucasoid (usually by focusing on the nasal-region, ignoring other traits, and this even shows in your source above). If someone sees a skull with narrow or narrowish nasal aperture, they consider it Caucasoid. A good example of this is Kennewick Man, which multivariate studies instead aligned with Ainu.
Originally posted by tropicals redacted:
quote:So the question remains, what do you think ideas of a white/Caucasian Tutankhamun are rooted in?
They would be instead the "elongated" African morph which Hierneux described, perhaps with some Saharan differences (see Krantz). But we don't have their pigmentation (although it can be inferred by latitude ).
quote:
The fact the "elongated" African morph is visually perceived by many as Caucasoid, or at least part Caucasoid (usually by focusing on the nasal-region, ignoring other traits, and this even shows in your source above). If someone sees a skull with narrow or narrowish nasal aperture, they consider it Caucasoid.
quote:And how doe this prove he was not of African type? All it states is his characteristics and not affinity. He could have had "elongated" characteristic like some Africans. Which is not taboo.
Originally posted by Gor:
Robins and Shute, 1983: "It is shown that the limbs of the pharaohs, like those of other Ancient Egyptians, had negroid characteristics, in that the distal segments were relatively long in comparison with the proximal segments. An exception was Ramesses II, who appears to have had short legs below the knees."
quote:No offense but this study appears to be brutally dated compared to the one I posted which showed Ramses having "Negroid" characteristics.
Originally posted by Gor:
""If the brachial (radio-humeral) and crural (tibio-femoral) indices are calculated for these remains, they are found to measure 75.1 and 82.6 respectively. These values, and the lengths of the humerus and femur, agree very closely with data presented for male American whites by Krogman in 1955." (Harrison, 1966)
The reason the 1983 study missed this was because KV55 was only identified with Akhenaten in 2010, so they probably excluded him from their study. [/QB]
quote:And this is why I said his study was dated. I remember an old study on remains in a Kenyan cave which tried to say the remains were "Caucasoid".
Originally posted by tropicals redacted:
And they would be wrong, wouldn't they?
quote:
The fact the "elongated" African morph is visually perceived by many as Caucasoid, or at least part Caucasoid (usually by focusing on the nasal-region, ignoring other traits, and this even shows in your source above). If someone sees a skull with narrow or narrowish nasal aperture, they consider it Caucasoid.
quote:You didn't post a study, you posted fake bullshit that never happened
Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus:
No offense but this study appears to be brutally dated compared to the one I posted which showed Ramses having "Negroid" characteristics.
quote:Wrong, no study had been posted. Is there an authors name, a journal? It's no more real than the Willie Lynch letter
Originally posted by Swenet:
Presumably you weren't here when it was originally
posted, but I recall that the thread in which it
initially appeared discussed (in real-time) that
the report was removed from the museum's site. In
other words, one moment it was on the site and the
other moment it was removed as people where
commenting in the thread in question. I believe
it was Wally's thread. Whoever created the thread,
it was originally posted by a reputable ES member.
That's my two cents on the article.
If you doubt it's authenticity, though, there are
ways of resolving that, that don't involve making
a priori claims it being a fabricated document.
quote:^^^ And you bought this?
According to preliminary indications, we reached a number of genetic traits of the Pharaohs. It was possible to identify the genes for size, skin color and eye color and hair of the king in the Pharaonic era from which samples were taken....
quote:No, you merely googled it because you were too
I researched it
quote:Yes. But i'm also pointing out that there are different inter-regional population means for (standard forensic) craniometrics in Africa. So there is no "African" cluster. I really think the papers from Alain Froment on this subject are excellent:
Originally posted by tropicals redacted:
[QB] And they would be wrong, wouldn't they?
quote:You didn't post a study, you posted fake bullshit that never happened [/QB][/QUOTE]
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Thanks for clarifying.
Originally posted by Swenet:
[Presumably you weren't here when it was originally
posted, but I recall that folks in the thread in
which it initially appeared, discussed (in real-time)
that the report was removed from the museum's site.
In other words, one moment it was on the site and
the other moment it was removed as people where
commenting in the thread in question. I believe
it was Wally's thread. Whoever created the thread,
it was originally posted by a reputable ES member.
That's my two cents on the article.
If you doubt it's authenticity, though, there are
ways of resolving that, that don't involve making
a priori claims it being a fabricated document.
quote:
Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus:
No offense but this study appears to be brutally dated compared to the one I posted which showed Ramses having "Negroid" characteristics.
Their size was rather average, with
the exception of Ramses II, whose analysis of genes has proven to be cut.
It has also been demonstrated that his skin was brown and his hair was black,
not red. The color red has been found on his mummy is due to a dye (probably henna).
His eyes were black with a slight tinge of brown.
--Nobody et al, 2000
quote:So they lack trasperancy but at the same time they blurt out stuff
Originally posted by Swenet
.. the Egyptian
antiquities has a long record of non-existent
transparency and blurting out claims of genetic
tests without conforming to any of the criteria
you're now using to call this document fake.
quote:
The hair of an eighty-year old such as Ramses would have turned white; however traces of the hair's original color remain in the roots even in advanced age. Examined microscopically, Ramses' hair proved to have once been red.
Bob Brier, Egyptian Mummies: Unravelling the Secrets of an Ancient Art, William Morrow & Co. Inc, New York. 1994. p.153
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
quote:Do you have a link and quote or do you do everything improperly and on a "just trust me" basis ?
Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus:
I wasn't only talking about the Cairo letter but mostly the X-ray Atlas of the Royal study Mummies which clearly showed Ramses had "Negroid" features and did not cluster away from Africans. So how about you get lost?
quote:What I find really interesting relating to Ramsses II is the Battle of Kadesh.
Originally posted by Gor:
quote:If there is good evidence against what I post i will retract my claim. I will do so here.
Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus:
^^^I don't know why Eurocentrics always overlook that? Good point.
Looking at the limb study abstract, it says Ramesses II doesn't match the others, furthermore he was reddish haired, so what about this?
Redheaded Pharaoh Ramesses II
http://marchofthetitans.com/earlson/rameses.htm
quote:Blablabla. The real question is, was your "research"
stuff that even if you could prove that it was up on their site the information itself lacks credibility, has no named author, does not conform to research standards and if they claimed to have done a genetic test that itself is a suspect claim.
quote:No one has made skull measurements except the cranial index, at least that is the only one I see in these studies. So I don't know how there are digital reconstructions of the face in the first place - they are equivalent to armchair anthropology. Even when I was into typology, I criticized this, e.g. its the sort of thing you find on a lowbrow anthro-forum where individuals upload their photo and are labelled up to 10 or more different oids. So this statement on the other page is totally false:
Originally posted by tropicals redacted:
So what's with the white/Caucasian King Tut reconstructions?
Anton concluded that Tut's cranial morphology "spoke fairly strongly of his African origins" and also, despite her gaff with the nose, said "I personally don't find that term [caucasoid] all that useful and so I don't use it."
The Science Museum reconstruction is based on a cast of his skull. Regardless of whether the face is an accurate portrayal, those involved with assigning the skull, it would seem, identified an individual that had sub-Saharan affinities- as apparent in the virtual reconstruction:
http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/antenna/tutankhamun/118.asp
You've also pointed out that "They [Royal Mummies]would be...the "elongated" African morph which Hierneux described, perhaps with some Saharan differences (see Krantz)."
What I don't get, is, if Susan Anton, the people behind the Science Museum reconstruction and you recognise that Tut was cranially/phenotypically sub-Saharan/Horner African, why does the latest reconstruction, which I think is scheduled to be shown on the BBC tonight, still show a Caucasian-looking individual.
What do you think impedes their understanding of African diversity, something which is based on scientific research, and which laypeople and autodidacts here on ES have assimilated?
quote:And bias works both ways. There may indeed be biased ethnocentric European scientists, but data is also manipulated or distorted by those with other agendas. This was shown with the Oase 2 (Peștera cu Oase) skull - a false/inaccurate reconstruction appeared which Clyde Winters loves to spam around.
What makes the above reconstruction unique is that I believe it was the ONLY one done by scientists who were double-blinded and therefore unbiased. Their conclusions were that the skull belonged to someone of African descent though I still think they were biased in that they gave him a wider nose tip under the stereotype that Africans have wide noses.
quote:The painted statue you posted is very different in photos [depending on the background lightening and so on]. Is his skin shade really a painted dark brown? It looks more a light brown-reddish in most I see on google images of the same statue. Also google Rahotep and you get loads of different shades of the same statue.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
Case in point, the BBC is portraying Tutankhamun as pale skinned when all depictions in the art show him as dark brown skinned.
quote:I didn't know about those, i will take a look. Though I find it easier if studies just provide indices e.g. cranial, nasal, cranial height-length, cranial height-breadth, upper facial, total facial, orbital, and palatal.
Originally posted by Swenet:
^The various reconstructions of Tut on the internet
were probably mostly based on measurements
taken from radiographs (see the values for Tut).
It explains why only Hawass et al and Elliot Smith
were able to publish CIs for these royal individuals
(they had access to the skeletal remains). Like I
said earlier, unlike brachycephaly in many parts
of Eurasia, the brachycephalic condition, when
found in Upper Egypt often isn't accompanied by
short skulls, which explains why all the forensic
artists called attention to the elongated head
shape of these NK pharaohs, and mistook them for
being dolichocephalic per se.
Also, the cranial index data from Harris and
Wente, despite being oddly defined (probably also
owing to the fact that they were working with
radiographs), still demonstrate that the pharaohs
had long (but not necessarily narrow) calvaria as
you wouldn't get such low values (e.g. 69%) for
cranial height/cranial length if their heads were
short and spherical like in many brachycephalic
Armenians and East Asians.
quote:- Bulbeck, 2011
Secondly, from the point of view of
classifying crania to their correct race, the criterion of success for Nubian crania should be to detect a ‘Caucasoid’ affinity rather than a specifically Egyptian affinity. This is
because the Egyptian populations studied by Howells (1973, 1989) are consistently more similar to Europeans than to populations elsewhere in the world. Indeed, in nine cases a European population measured by Howells provided the closest match to one of the Nubian specimens studied by Williams et al. (2005), similar to the ten cases where Howells’s Egyptian population made the closest match.
quote:Apparently based on the morphology of the skull, they brought together individuals from an 'appropriate' ethnic group, scanned their faces and then merged them to get an average.
So I don't know how there are digital reconstructions of the face in the first place - they are equivalent to armchair anthropology
quote:Given what you've said about all the Royal Mummies, save two, having tropical limb lengths; that they were 'elongated' African'; and that according to Froment, "[Black] populations of the Horn of Africa (Tigré and Somalia) fit well into Egyptian variations..."
And bias works both ways. There may indeed be biased ethnocentric European scientists, but data is also manipulated or distorted by those with other agendas.
quote:So the Caucasian reconstructions of Tut are tainted by ethnocentric, European bias?
There may indeed be biased ethnocentric European scientists
quote:Don't be ridiculous we are not dealing with any data
Originally posted by Swenet:
I have to agree with Horus that at least part of
lioness' reservations around this document comes
from her long noted anxiety towards any empirical
data that threatens her "Mulatto Egypt" fairy tale.
quote:Show me one academic source which considers Diop's dubious "melanin dosage test" legitimate method
Originally posted by Swenet:
Lioness has had this exact same attitude towards
similar data, which, despite being completely
uncontroversial, was still subjected by her to thread
pages long of what can only be described as dogmatic
denial. Case in point: Diop's melanin dosage test,
which is uncontroversial among academics, but
she has tried to fight it with tooth and nail for a
long time.
quote:Now you are trying to insert the lingo " empirical findings" into this unsourced suspect item seem legit still trying to make it seem like data was mentioned.
Originally posted by Swenet:
Thing is, she's sort of cleaned up her act
so the new guys aren't on to this side of her, which
will routinely get offended by empirical findings
and then hide behind a façade of justified skepticism.
quote:The difference is that article which actually is up on the governent website currently says:
Originally posted by Swenet:
For whatever it's worth: Apparently there was a
flurry of published egyptological articles on the
sis.gov.eg site on 20 July 2009, months before
Wally's posting of the disputed article; at least
one of these articles was partly genetic in nature.
Note the similar vagueness in any specifics other
than the bare announcement itself and the institutions
that were involved (also note the similarities
in layout between the disputed report and the
article I just linked to).
quote:Holy sh!t. Still in denial of the fact that Melanin
Originally posted by the lioness,:
Show me one academic source which considers Diop's
dubious "melanin dosage test" legitimate method
quote:^The fabricated date aside, you're shifting the
Originally posted by the lioness,:
Yet there is no record of genetic testing conducted on Rameses by Cairo University in 2000
quote:http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-pre-draft-measurements.php
Originally posted by Gor:
[QB]quote:Robins and Shute, 1983: "It is shown that the limbs of the pharaohs, like those of other Ancient Egyptians, had negroid characteristics, in that the distal segments were relatively long in comparison with the proximal segments. An exception was Ramesses II, who appears to have had short legs below the knees."
Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus:
Which limb studies state that Ramses II does not match with other Africans?
Ramesses II however was not the single exception; Akhenaten's radio-humeral and tibio-femoral indices also align him with 'White Americans':
""If the brachial (radio-humeral) and crural (tibio-femoral) indices are calculated for these remains, they are found to measure 75.1 and 82.6 respectively. These values, and the lengths of the humerus and femur, agree very closely with data presented for male American whites by Krogman in 1955." (Harrison, 1966)
quote:why are you saying I'm in denial of the fact that Melanin
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Holy sh!t. Still in denial of the fact that Melanin
Originally posted by the lioness,:
Show me one academic source which considers Diop's
dubious "melanin dosage test" legitimate method
can be preserved in mummified skin, that this is
acknowledged academically and that high densities
of melanin in the epidermis lead to what the human
eye would perceive dark skin, which is also
acknowledged in the literature?
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
Yet there is no record of genetic testing conducted on Rameses by Cairo University in 2000
quote:The fact that you are saying that I fabricated the date 2000 shows you've done no research on the topic and havent read my links on the previous page to a French forum mentioning the article or Wally where he says the year is 2000
Originally posted by Swenet:
^The fabricated date aside, you're shifting the
goal post. Your original complaint was that it
was fake because it was unsourced and did not
conform to academic standards. [/QB]
quote:The "Melanin Dosage Test" is a specific detailed proceedure invented by Cheikh Anta Diop
Originally posted by Tukuler:
[QB] Melanin dosage tests aren't a Diop (who
in 1950 received the two certificates of
chemistry: general chemistry and applied
chemistry) only thing. His conclusions
are no different than others who tested
mummy melanin (Mekota & Vermehren 2005).
quote:I am afraid that tropical limb ratio is a bit more complex, than having a lanky body type. It is actually base on metrical data. SMH
Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes:
quote:http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-pre-draft-measurements.php
Originally posted by Gor:
[QB]quote:Robins and Shute, 1983: "It is shown that the limbs of the pharaohs, like those of other Ancient Egyptians, had negroid characteristics, in that the distal segments were relatively long in comparison with the proximal segments. An exception was Ramesses II, who appears to have had short legs below the knees."
Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus:
Which limb studies state that Ramses II does not match with other Africans?
Ramesses II however was not the single exception; Akhenaten's radio-humeral and tibio-femoral indices also align him with 'White Americans':
""If the brachial (radio-humeral) and crural (tibio-femoral) indices are calculated for these remains, they are found to measure 75.1 and 82.6 respectively. These values, and the lengths of the humerus and femur, agree very closely with data presented for male American whites by Krogman in 1955." (Harrison, 1966)
Even in the NBA where it literately pays to have long limbs there are many exceptions. Plenty lanky white dudes and stubby blacks.
besides this is his son
http://www.crystalinks.com/Merneptah_2.jpg
This is his skin tone
quote:EARLY NILE VALLEY FARMERS
Originally posted by Gor:
quote:I didn't know about those, i will take a look. Though I find it easier if studies just provide indices e.g. cranial, nasal, cranial height-length, cranial height-breadth, upper facial, total facial, orbital, and palatal.
Originally posted by Swenet:
^The various reconstructions of Tut on the internet
were probably mostly based on measurements
taken from radiographs (see the values for Tut).
It explains why only Hawass et al and Elliot Smith
were able to publish CIs for these royal individuals
(they had access to the skeletal remains). Like I
said earlier, unlike brachycephaly in many parts
of Eurasia, the brachycephalic condition, when
found in Upper Egypt often isn't accompanied by
short skulls, which explains why all the forensic
artists called attention to the elongated head
shape of these NK pharaohs, and mistook them for
being dolichocephalic per se.
Also, the cranial index data from Harris and
Wente, despite being oddly defined (probably also
owing to the fact that they were working with
radiographs), still demonstrate that the pharaohs
had long (but not necessarily narrow) calvaria as
you wouldn't get such low values (e.g. 69%) for
cranial height/cranial length if their heads were
short and spherical like in many brachycephalic
Armenians and East Asians.
In regards to the cranial length, I have a quote somewhere:
“In their Results section, the authors stated that "Akhenaten has [a cephalic]
index of 81.0 and Tutankhamun an index of 83.9, indicating brachycephaly. .
. . Thutmose II . . . show[s] dolichocephaly, with [a cephalic index] of 73.4."
Nevertheless, these skulls are visibly abnormally elongated, having the
"family head" of the 18th dynasty. (Irwin M. Braverman, MD, Department of
Dermatology, Yale Medical School, New Haven, Connecticut, and Philip A.
Mackowiak, MD, MBA, Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Baltimore, Maryland)
http://www.fitzmuseum.cam.ac.uk/er/cyberscribe/CyberScribe-179-July%202010.pdf
And can you explain this?
quote:- Bulbeck, 2011
Secondly, from the point of view of
classifying crania to their correct race, the criterion of success for Nubian crania should be to detect a ‘Caucasoid’ affinity rather than a specifically Egyptian affinity. This is
because the Egyptian populations studied by Howells (1973, 1989) are consistently more similar to Europeans than to populations elsewhere in the world. Indeed, in nine cases a European population measured by Howells provided the closest match to one of the Nubian specimens studied by Williams et al. (2005), similar to the ten cases where Howells’s Egyptian population made the closest match.
Is this because Howells reference database is only Egypt: Gizeh, 26th-30th Dynasties?
quote:--Frank Yurco
"Analysis of Predinastic skeletal material showed tropical African elements in the population of the earliest populations of the earliest Badarian culture"
[...]
quote:--Joel D. Irish (2006). Who Were the Ancient Egyptians? Dental Affinities Among Neolithic Through Postdynastic Peoples. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2006 Apr;129(4):529-43.)
"Despite the difference, Gebel Ramlah [the Western Desert- Saharan region] is closest to predynastic and early dynastic samples from Abydos, Hierakonpolis, and Badari.." [the Badarians are a "good representative of what the common ancestor to all later predynastic and dynastic Egyptian peoples would be like"
quote:--K. Goddea, et al.
Many authors have speculated on Nubian biological evolution. Because of the contact Nubians had with other peoples, migration and/or invasion (biological diffusion) were originally thought to be the biological mechanism for skeletal changes in Nubians. Later, a new hypothesis was put forth, the in situ hypothesis. The new hypothesis postulated that Nubians evolved in situ, without much genetic influence from foreign populations. This study examined 12 Egyptian and Nubian groups in an effort to explore the relationship between the two populations and to test the in situ hypothesis. Data from nine cranial nonmetric traits were assessed for an estimate of biological distance, using Mahalanobis D2 with a tetrachoric matrix. The distance scores were then input into principal coordinates analysis (PCO) to depict the relationships between the two populations. PCO detected 60% of the variation in the first two principal coordinates. A plot of the distance scores revealed only one cluster; the Nubian and Egyptian groups clustered together. The grouping of the Nubians and Egyptians indicates there may have been some sort of gene flow between these groups of Nubians and Egyptians. However, common adaptation to similar environments may also be responsible for this pattern. Although the predominant results in this study appear to support the biological diffusion hypothesis, the in situ hypothesis was not completely negated.
quote:Am J Phys Anthropol. 2012 Feb;147(2):280-92. doi: 10.1002/ajpa.21645. Epub 2011 Dec 20.
The Garamantian civilization flourished in modern Fezzan, Libya, between 900 BC and 500 AD, during which the aridification of the Sahara was well established. Study of the archaeological remains suggests a population successful at coping with a harsh environment of high and fluctuating temperatures and reduced water and food resources. This study explores the activity patterns of the Garamantes by means of cross-sectional geometric properties. Long bone diaphyseal shape and rigidity are compared between the Garamantes and populations from Egypt and Sudan, namely from the sites of Kerma, el-Badari, and Jebel Moya, to determine whether the Garamantian daily activities were more strenuous than those of other North African populations. Moreover, sexual dimorphism and bilateral asymmetry are assessed at an intra- and inter-population level. The inter-population comparisons showed the Garamantes not to be more robust than the comparative populations, suggesting that the daily Garamantian activities necessary for survival in the Sahara Desert did not generally impose greater loads than those of other North African populations. Sexual dimorphism and bilateral asymmetry in almost all geometric properties of the long limbs were comparatively low among the Garamantes. Only the lower limbs were significantly stronger among males than females, possibly due to higher levels of mobility associated with herding. The lack of systematic bilateral asymmetry in cross-sectional geometric properties may relate to the involvement of the population in bilaterally intensive activities or the lack of regular repetition of unilateral activities.
quote:--Sonia R. Zakrzewski. (2007). Population Continuity
"As a result of their facial prognathism, the Badarian
sample has been described as forming a
morphological cluster with Nubian, Tigrean, and
other southern (or \Negroid") groups (Morant, 1935,
1937; Mukherjee et al., 1955; Nutter, 1958, Strouhal,
1971; Angel, 1972; Keita, 1990). Cranial nonmetric
trait studies have found this group to be similar to
other Egyptians, including much later material (Berry
and Berry, 1967, 1972), but also to be significantly
different from LPD material (Berry et al., 1967).
Similarly, the study of dental nonmetric traits has
suggested that the Badarian population is at the
centroid of Egyptian dental samples (Irish, 2006),
thereby suggesting similarity and hence continuity
across Egyptian time periods. From the central
location of the Badarian samples in Figure 2, the
current study finds the Badarian to be relatively
morphologically close to the centroid of all the
Egyptian samples. The Badarian have been shown to
exhibit
greatest morphological similarity with the temporally
successive EPD (Table 5). Finally, the biological
distinctiveness
of the Badarian from other Egyptian samples has also
been demonstrated (Tables 6 and 7).
These results suggest that the EDyn do form a
distinct morphological pattern. Their overlap with
other Egyptian samples (in PC space, Fig. 2)
suggests that although their morphology is
distinctive, the pattern does overlap with the other
time periods. These results therefore do not support
the Petrie concept of a \Dynastic race" (Petrie, 1939;
Derry, 1956). Instead, the results suggest that the
Egyptian state was not the product of mass
movement of populations into the Egyptian Nile
region, but rather that it was the result of primarily
indigenous development combined with prolonged
small-scale migration, potentially from trade, military,
or other contacts.
This evidence suggests that the process of state
formation itself may have been mainly an indigenous
process, but that it may have occurred in association
with in-migration to the Abydos region of the Nile
Valley. This potential in-migration may have
occurred particularly during the EDyn and OK. A
possible explanation is that the Egyptian state formed
through increasing control of trade and raw
materials, or due to military actions, potentially
associated with the use of the Nile Valley as a
corridor for prolonged small scale movements
through the desert environment.
quote:--Keita, Studies of Ancient Crania From Northern Africa
"Badarian (8) occupies a position closest to the Teita, Gaboon, Nubian, and Nagada series by centroid values and territorial maps. The Nagada and the Kerma series are so similar that they are barely INDISTINGUISHABLE in the territorial maps; they subsume the first dynasty series in Abydos… The Badarian crania have a modal metric phenotype that is clearly “southern”; most classify into the Kerma (Nubian), Gaboon, and Kenyan groups…No Badarian cranium in any analysis classified into the European series, and few grouped with the “E” series…Nutter (1958) found that they [the Nagada] are essentially identical to the Badarian series. The classification of crania into specific groups does NOT imply identity with those specific series, only AFFINITIES with broad patterns connoting COMMON ORIGINS..." - Keita, Studies of Ancient Crania From Northern Africa
quote:-- SOY Keita , Royal Incest and Diffusion in Africa
..the early cultures of Merimde, the
Fayum, Badari Naqada I and II are
essentially African and early African
social customs and religious beliefs were
the root and foundation of the ancient
Egyptian way of life." (Source: Shaw,
(Thurston (1976)) Changes in African
Archaeology in the Last Forty Years in
African Studies since 1945. p. 156-68.
London.)
quote:--Jean Hiernaux
The oldest remains of Homo sapiens sapiens found in East Africa were associated with an industry having similarities with the Capsian. It has been called Upper Kenyan Capsian, although its derivation from the North African Capsian is far from certain. At Gamble's Cave in Kenya, five human skeletons were associated with a late phase of the industry, Upper Kenya Capsian C, which contains pottery...
The skeletons are of very tall people. They had long, narrow heads, and relatively long, narrow faces. The nose was of medium width; and prognathism, when present, was restricted to the alveolar, or tooth-bearing, region... all their features can be found in several living populations of East Africa, like the Tutsi of Rwanda and Burundi, who are very dark skinned and differ greatly from Europeans in a number of body proportions...
From the foregoing, it is tempting to locate the area of differentiation of these people in the interior of East Africa. There is every reason to believe that they are ancestral to the living 'Elongated East Africans'. Neither of these populations, fossil and modern, should be considered to be closely related to the populations of Europe and western Asia.
[...]
"In sub-Saharan Africa, many anthropological characters show a wide range of population means or frequencies. In some of them, the whole world range is covered in the sub-continent. Here live the shortest and the tallest human populations, the one with the highest and the one with the lowest nose, the one with the thickest and the one with the thinnest lips in the world. In this area, the range of the average nose widths covers 92 per cent of the world range:
only a narrow range of extremely low means are absent from the African record. Means for head diameters cover about 80 per cent of the world range; 60 per cent is the corresponding value for a variable once cherished by physical anthropologists, the cephalic index, or ratio of the head width to head length expressed as a percentage....."
quote:If that's the case then the original poster of
Originally posted by the lioness,:
You claimed Diop's melanin dosage test is
uncontroversial among academics yet have not been
able to produce one academic even mentioning Diop's
melanin dosage test
quote:That's a non-sequitur. I said the test itself is
Originally posted by the lioness,:
You claimed Diop's melanin dosage test is
uncontroversial among academics yet have not been
able to produce one academic even mentioning
Diop's melanin dosage test
quote:We have posted this info so many times to him, the lioness. That it actually becomes funny, how this person is still in denial.
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Holy sh!t. Still in denial of the fact that Melanin
Originally posted by the lioness,:
Show me one academic source which considers Diop's
dubious "melanin dosage test" legitimate method
can be preserved in mummified skin, that this is
acknowledged academically and that high densities
of melanin in the epidermis lead to what the human
eye would perceive dark skin, which is also
acknowledged in the literature?
quote:^The fabricated date aside, you're shifting the
Originally posted by the lioness,:
Yet there is no record of genetic testing conducted on Rameses by Cairo University in 2000
goal post. Your original complaint was that it
was fake because it was unsourced and did not
conform to academic standards.
quote:I did not say Diop's idea was dubious.
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:That's a non-sequitur. I said the test itself is
Originally posted by the lioness,:
You claimed Diop's melanin dosage test is
uncontroversial among academics yet have not been
able to produce one academic even mentioning
Diop's melanin dosage test
uncontroversial. That doesn't require anyone to
explicitly credit Diop with it or label it the
"dosage test". You, on the other hand, said Diop's
idea was dubious,
quote:Your reasons for dismissing Diop's proposal and
Originally posted by the lioness,:
Results not been verified or the conclusions he draws from them, tha0t such a test can verify "Negroid" has not been verifeid by other professional researchers, biologists, forensic experts
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
quote:What I posted was also based on metrical data. Plenty metrical data. If I have someone's standing reach, wingspan, and height it tells me how long their arms are in respect to how wide their shoulders are. The joint radius that Gor is referring to is at best identifying a lanky build. If not please explain. I'm really curious to know how someone's joint radius is independent of their arm's length in respect to height and shoulder width. Is it true that someone can have shorter arms and shoulder width than the average white American but still have a 'tropical build' based on their joints? That would be interesting.
Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor:
I am afraid that tropical limb ratio is a bit more complex, than having a lanky body type. It is actually base on metrical data. SMH
By that way, what does the scene above tell/ talks about?
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Your reasons for dismissing Diop's proposal and
Originally posted by the lioness,:
Results not been verified or the conclusions he draws from them, tha0t such a test can verify "Negroid" has not been verifeid by other professional researchers, biologists, forensic experts
that French report are all over the place. You
keep shifting the goalpost when one of your earlier
objections has been falsified or shown to be
fallacious.
I bet if I post this for the 2nd time, you'll find
some entirely different detail to be in denial
about.
Source
quote:Calling the procedure he proposed a "proposal" is
I said nothing about a Diop proposal. You are constantly trying to manipulate languauge. It's a test proceedure not a proposal.
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
Your point is moot. Diop's work demonstrates that he
was well aware of your fallacious objection. Snippets
online that reveal his intentions around the dosage
test make it clear that he intended to rule out that
Egyptians had light skin; he never intended it to be
a tool to zero in on which type of strongly pigmented
population he was dealing with.
quote:Of course it is. He said that he invented a testing method that can determine if a skin sample is Caucasian or Negroid ( an we knpw that the world is only comprised of these two types)
Where are the quotes or links to these "snippets" ?
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Swenet:
Calling the procedure he proposed a "proposal" is
manipulation? You'd do good to stop talking out
the side of your neck and get down to business.
What exactly is it that you dispute about the
dosage test, and how have you determined that it
is "dubious" and unsupported by academics? [/QB]
quote:This to me is dark skinned:
Originally posted by tropicals redacted:
@cass
quote:Apparently based on the morphology of the skull, they brought together individuals from an 'appropriate' ethnic group, scanned their faces and then merged them to get an average.
So I don't know how there are digital reconstructions of the face in the first place - they are equivalent to armchair anthropology
quote:Given what you've said about all the Royal Mummies, save two, having tropical limb lengths; that they were 'elongated' African'; and that according to Froment, "[Black] populations of the Horn of Africa (Tigré and Somalia) fit well into Egyptian variations..."
And bias works both ways. There may indeed be biased ethnocentric European scientists, but data is also manipulated or distorted by those with other agendas.
What bias do you perceive with the Science Museum's reconstruction?
Do you perceive any bias in Susan Anton's comments on Tut's African (read sub-Saharan) origins?
quote:So the Caucasian reconstructions of Tut are tainted by ethnocentric, European bias?
There may indeed be biased ethnocentric European scientists
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:
There is thus all the more reason for it to be readily recoverable in the skins of Egyptian mummies, despite a tenacious legend that the skin of mummies, tainted by the embalming material, is no longer susceptible of any analysis.21 Although the epidermis is the main site of the melanin, the melanocytes penetrating the derm at the boundary between it and the epidermis, even where the latter has mostly been destroyed by the embalming materials, show a melanin level which is non-existent in the white-skinned races.
The samples I myself analyzed were taken in the physical anthropology laboratory of the Mus'ee de l'Homme in Paris off the mummies from the Marietta excavations in Egypt. The same method is perfectly suitable for use on the royal mummies of Thutmoses III, Seti I and Ramses II in the Cairo Museum, which are in an excel state of preservation.
For two years past I have been vainly begging the curator of the Cairo Museum for similar samples to analyze. No more than a few square millimetres of skin would be required to mount a specimen, the preparations being a few um in thickness and lightened with ethyl benzoate. They can be studied by natural light or with ultra-violet lighting which renders the melanin grains fluorescent.
Either way let us simply say that the evaluation of melanin level by microscopic examination is a laboratory method which enables us to classify the ancient Egyptians unquestionably among the black races.
-Diop
quote:
Dr. Diop, speaking deliberately and uncompromisingly, pointed out that:
"A racial classification is given to a group of individuals who share a certain number of anthropological traits, which is necessary so that they not be confused with others. There are two aspects which must be distinguished, the phenotypical and genotypical. I have frequently elaborated on these two aspects. If we speak only of the genotype, I can find a black who, at the level of his chromosomes, is closer to a Swede than Peter Botha is.
But what counts in reality is the phenotype. It is the physical appearance which counts. This black, even if on the level of his cells he is closer than Peter Botha, when he is in South Africa he will live in Soweto. Throughout history, it has always been the phenotype which has been at issue; we mustn't lose sight of this fact. The phenotype is a reality, physical appearance is a reality.
Now, every time these relationships are not favorable to the Western cultures, an effort is made to undermine the cultural consciousness of Africans by telling them, `We don't even know what a race is.'
It is the phenotype which as given us so much difficulty throughout history, so it is this which must be considered in these relations. It exists, is a reality and cannot be repudiated"
quote:wrong, you have no quote of Diop describing Asian populaltions as black
Originally posted by Swenet:
in fact,
never subscribed to the idea that a bunch of
melanin granules on a histology slide can
distinguish between various dark skinned African
and Asian populations
Diop only sought to
exclude light skinned populations with this aspect
of his larger body of evidence.
quote:^^^ He specifically says Melanin dosage ( his unique term "dosage") can indicate Negro
" It is also correct that one could trace back, so to speak, to that racial factor and determine its importance, starting from the “dosage of the amount of melanin” contained in the epidermis, especially in the epidermis of an Egyptian mummy. It is also certain that such a study would classify Egyptians among Negroes, according to the samples available to me and that I have selected entirely at random
--The African Origin of Civilization, Diop
quote:I just found a new study (Sanders et al. 2014). Apparently Howells "E series" (that is the 111 skulls dating to the 26th-30th Dynasties in his reference database) show strongest similarity to crania from Classical Athens:
Originally posted by Swenet:
The Egyptian sample from Howells database dates to
the Late Dynastic, yes, but from all the studies
I've seen it feature in, they're in between European
and African samples from the interior, like modern
day Maghrebi, not squarely in European samples' midst.
quote:http://meeting.physanth.org/program/2014/session10/sanders-2014-craniometric-analysis-of-the-howells-egyptian-sample-the-greek-connection.html
The Howells Egypt sample, though most closely related to other late Egyptian samples, is more closely related to the Classical Greek sample from Attica than is any earlier Egyptian group.
quote:But this actually doesn't surprise me now, given the clinal data I was discussing before. If i'm not mistaken Angel put out a paper on Cephallenia and was discussing Egyptian ties.
The Predynastic groups, Badari and Naqada, cluster together and are part of a deep cluster along with the Greeks from Cephallenia and Crete.
quote:His database is online. But he three books (1973, 1989, 1995) that discuss his work are not. I never owned them, but you can find limited page scans or quotes on various anthro-forums. They cost like $100 or more to purchase.
Do you have access to Howells' work? I want to test this explanation.
quote:why even bother discussing it. It's late period
Originally posted by Gor:
[QB]quote:I just found a new study (Sanders et al. 2014). Apparently Howells "E series" (that is the 111 skulls dating to the 26th-30th Dynasties in his reference database) show strongest similarity to crania from Classical Athens:
Originally posted by Swenet:
The Egyptian sample from Howells database dates to
the Late Dynastic, yes, but from all the studies
I've seen it feature in, they're in between European
and African samples from the interior, like modern
day Maghrebi, not squarely in European samples' midst.
quote:Given your Froment quote:
This to me is dark skinned:
The New Face of King Tut National Geographic
I guess what someone considers dark or light is to some degree relative to their own skin tone. I don't personally see this reconstruction as a 'White Tut', he's basically a bronze colour, but someone who has darker brown skin probably considers this to be light in comparison.
quote:I notice with your image, you chose the 'darkest', or at least one of the darkest images available. Compare with this:
he's basically a bronze colour, but someone who has darker brown skin probably considers this to be light in comparison.
quote:5)Why do you think the Science Museum reconstruction was given a noticeably darker complexion, more recognisably seen in African populations, if "what someone considers dark or light is to some degree relative to their own skin tone"?:
This to me is dark skinned:
The New Face of King Tut National Geographic
I guess what someone considers dark or light is to some degree relative to their own skin tone...someone who has darker brown skin probably considers this to be light in comparison.
quote:Studies estimate human individuals are overall 99.9% identical in genotype. Of that remaining 0.1%, inter-individual differences account for 90%, while 10% is found between supra-individuals (populations). The latter is mirrored in phenotype. So we're looking at 0.01% of biological variation that correlates with geography. That 0.01% still exists, so no physical anthropologist denies there is a geographical structure to craniometrics, even if it is very weak. You can still find large frequency differentials in certain traits between populations, hence different means or averages. However the way this is structured fits an isolation by distance population model as opposed to race clustering. This is why Howells (1995) gave up race, but argued for populations instead of just clines. In response to Livingstone who wrote "there are no races, there are only clines", Howell's remarked: "there are no races, there are only populations".
Originally posted by Tukuler:
Late, but about some earlier posts
Cranial indices??? Please!
Craniometric variables.
Cranial non-metric traits.
Please, no ratios, indexes, or
other combining of variables.
Dixon's work on indices made
Britain ⅓ D-H-P "proto-negroid"
(iirc, no longer owning the book).
Indices are just not racially applicable.
Why? There's too much intra-racial variety.
quote:^^^ this means he's describing
Originally posted by Swenet:
@Lioness
quote:
"wrong, you have no quote of Diop describing
Asian populaltions as black"
In fact, you've already supplied us with one, re:
"If we speak only of the genotype, I can find a black who, at the level of his chromosomes, is closer to a Swede than Peter Botha is.
But what counts in reality is the phenotype. It is the physical appearance which counts."
quote:Here he says his test can determine who is a Negro and who is not a Negro
" It is also correct that one could trace back, so to speak, to that racial factor and determine its importance, starting from the “dosage of the amount of melanin” contained in the epidermis, especially in the epidermis of an Egyptian mummy. It is also certain that such a study would classify Egyptians among Negroes, according to the samples available to me and that I have selected entirely at random
--The African Origin of Civilization, Diop
quote:Exactly. Hope you know you're describing yourself.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
[QB]quote:^^^ this means he's describing
Originally posted by Swenet:
In fact, you've already supplied us with one, re:
Asian populaltions as black???
scratching my head at how far you can stretch an interpretation
quote:It doesn't, but we already know from your reading
Originally posted by the lioness,:
Here he says his test can determine who is a Negro and who is not a Negro
quote:Please, stop it. Do yourself and anyone else this favor. Because you're making a fool out of yourself again. You simply lack understanding on the subject.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Your reasons for dismissing Diop's proposal and
Originally posted by the lioness,:
Results not been verified or the conclusions he draws from them, tha0t such a test can verify "Negroid" has not been verifeid by other professional researchers, biologists, forensic experts
that French report are all over the place. You
keep shifting the goalpost when one of your earlier
objections has been falsified or shown to be
fallacious.
I bet if I post this for the 2nd time, you'll find
some entirely different detail to be in denial
about.
Source
A skin sample can determine if these people are Caucasian or Negroid ?
I said nothing about a Diop proposal. You are constantly trying to manipulate languauge. It's a test proceedure not a proposal.
I believe the egyptians had brown skin- so why the hell are you arguing? Look at the title of the thread. Look at my color corrected version of the reconstuction pg1, obviously critical
Swenet you love to argue for argument's sake. That's your MO at ES
quote:http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/01/140126134643.htm
Lalueza-Fox states: "However, the biggest surprise was to discover that this individual possessed African versions in the genes that determine the light pigmentation of the current Europeans, which indicates that he had dark skin, although we can not know the exact shade."
quote:--Carles Lalueza-Fox
Figure 2 | Ancestral variants around the SLC45A2 (rs16891982, above) and SLC24A5 (rs1426654, below) pigmentation genes in the Mesolithic genome.
The SNPs around the two diagnostic variants (red arrows) in these two genes were analysed. The resulting haplotype comprises neighbouring SNPs that are also absent in modern Europeans (CEU) (n = 112) but present in Yorubans (YRI) (n = 113). This pattern confirms that the La Braña 1 sample is older than the positive-selection event in these regions. Blue, ancestral; red, derived.
quote:What you posted was your opinion, not metrical data. In other words, it's a wild guess.
Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes:
quote:What I posted was also based on metrical data. Plenty metrical data. If I have someone's standing reach, wingspan, and height it tells me how long their arms are in respect to how wide their shoulders are. The joint radius that Gor is referring to is at best identifying a lanky build. If not please explain. I'm really curious to know how someone's joint radius is independent of their arm's length in respect to height and shoulder width. Is it true that someone can have shorter arms and shoulder width than the average white American but still have a 'tropical build' based on their joints? That would be interesting.
Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor:
I am afraid that tropical limb ratio is a bit more complex, than having a lanky body type. It is actually base on metrical data. SMH
By that way, what does the scene above tell/ talks about?
From what little I can translate of the glyphs and rely on questionable sources this is propaganda against a specific clan or banner as a means to unite people against 'insubordinates' in the region. [/QB]
quote:--Holliday TW, Hilton CE.
In fact, in terms of body shape, the European and the Inuit samples tend to be cold-adapted and tend to be separated in multivariate space from the more tropically adapted Africans, especially those groups from south of the Sahara.
quote:--Berry Kemp
Moving to the opposite geographical extremity, the very small sample populations available from northern Egypt from before the 1st Dynasty (Merimda, Maadi and Wadi Digla) turn out to be significantly different from sample populations from early Palestine and Byblos, suggesting a lack of common ancestors over a long time. If there was a south-north cline of variation along the Nile valley it did not, from this limited evidence, continue smoothly on into southern Palestine. The limb-length proportions of males from the Egyptian sites group them with Africans rather than with Europeans.
quote:Terrible source there. I've seen the book pages,
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Exactly. Hope you know you're describing yourself.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
[QB]quote:^^^ this means he's describing
Originally posted by Swenet:
In fact, you've already supplied us with one, re:
Asian populaltions as black???
scratching my head at how far you can stretch an interpretation
Source
quote:It doesn't, but we already know from your reading
Originally posted by the lioness,:
Here he says his test can determine who is a Negro and who is not a Negro
of other parts of Diop and my use of "proposal"
that you read whatever you want to read.
quote:Journal of African Civilizations. Van Sertima, Ivan & Williams, Larry (eds.), Great African Thinkers - Cheikh Anta Diop: New Brunswick, NJ, Tranaction Books 1986. pp. 235-36.
" And this appearance corresponds to something which makes us say that Europe is peopled by white people, Africa is peopled by black people, and Asia is people by yellow people. It is these relationships which have played a role in history...
But what counts in reality is the phenotype. It is the physical appearance which counts.
--- Cheikh Anta Diop"
quote:This looks like what they did with Oase 2. Both Tut and Oase 2 do not have wide nasal aperture, but they have reconstructed both of them as having platyrrhine-flat noses. So the Science Museum reconstruction is not accurate at least in the nasal region.
Originally posted by tropicals redacted:
[QB] @cass
1)What bias do you perceive with the Science Museum's reconstruction?
quote:
2)Do you perceive any bias in Susan Anton's comments on Tut's African (read sub-Saharan) origins?
quote:He's talking about their crania only (?).
Given your Froment quote:
"[Black] populations of the Horn of Africa (Tigré and Somalia) fit well into Egyptian variations..."
quote:Just look at how most ancient Egyptians artworks are painted. They're contrasted to their southern neighbours who are dark brown, so this comment is not reasonable at all. The modal colour was coppery (reddish-brown). The only place dark brown skin was common in ancient Egypt was at the southern region(s) of Upper Egypt. And compare other countries at the same latitude to see this.
And Keita's inferences based on latitude:
"one might reasonably say that the typical Upper Egyptian to Nubian color would have been the modal colour in most of the country."
quote:Most white people would consider Tut to be dark, even that image.
I notice with your image, you chose the 'darkest', or at least one of the darkest images available. Compare with this:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/05/images/051005_tutsface.jpg
4)Why did you select the one you did?
quote:They're wrong on the nose, the skin colour too by latitude. Look at the above map I linked. The King Tut reconstruction I posted appears far closer to the pigmentation on that map.
Why do you think the Science Museum reconstruction was given a noticeably darker complexion, more recognisably seen in African populations, if "what someone considers dark or light is to some degree relative to their own skin tone"?:
quote:Surely you've observed that not only did Egyptians conventionally paint Nubians as jet-black, but they also distinguished themselves as darker than what we would consider Middle Eastern or even Mediterranean North African people:
Originally posted by Gor:
Just look at how most ancient Egyptians artworks are painted. They're contrasted to their southern neighbours who are dark brown, so this comment is not reasonable at all. The modal colour was coppery (reddish-brown). The only place dark brown skin was common in ancient Egypt was at the southern region(s) of Upper Egypt. And compare other countries at the same latitude to see this.
quote:can yoiu prove this with recorded nasal apeture measurment from each of these cases?
Originally posted by Gor:
Both Tut and Oase 2 do not have wide nasal aperture, but they have reconstructed both of them as having platyrrhine-flat noses.
quote:This issue has plagued FORDISC. There are different arguments - one supporting few variables, the other many, or more. We see the same thing with Upper Palaeolithic European skulls: few or less variables come out Zulu, or Bushman, but 40+, come out Norse from Howells reference bank:
Originally posted by Swenet:
[QB] @Gor
What you tend to see with craniometric samples
with no controls (i.e. a larger set of European
and African comparative samples) is that (pre)
dynastic Nile Valley groups will join non-African
dendrogram branches. Without said larger context
the Giza sample will also group with Ethiopians.
As for the Giza sample, it has been compared to
Greeks and Italians before, along with Egyptian,
Nubian and Somali samples. Results in table 5.
The Late Dynastic Giza sample is somewhat of an
enigma. It has been known to group with the
Kerma sample before Egyptian samples in non-
metric analysis and in geometric morphometric
analysis. However, in normal metric analyses
with a modest amount of variables, you'll find
that they typically plot in between inner African
populations and (northern) Europeans. But when
you increase the amount of variables to ~50 as in
Zakrzewski 2002, they start behaving funny and
can be separated from earlier Nile Valley groups
with great ease. This is why I suspect that
analyses with large numbers of variables may be
more prone to inflating certain inter-sample
differences that wouldn't be emphasized as much
in analyses with a more simple set up.
quote:- Jantz and Owsley (2003)
those skulls expressing Norse affinity are the most complete and have the highest number of measurements (x̄ = 50.8), while those expressing affinity to African populations (Bushman or Zulu) are the most incomplete, averaging just 16.8 measurements per skull. Use of highly incomplete or reconstructed crania may not yield a good estimate of their morphometric affinities. When one considers only those crania with 40 or more measurements, a majority express European affinity.
quote:Do you actually think the Luschan Scale is correct?
Originally posted by Gor:
Just look at how most ancient Egyptians artworks are painted. They're contrasted to their southern neighbours who are dark brown, so this comment is not reasonable at all. The modal colour was coppery (reddish-brown). The only place dark brown skin was common in ancient Egypt was at the southern region(s) of Upper Egypt. And compare other countries at the same latitude to see this.
Take a look at a Luschan scale map:
quote:- Snowden, 1997
"Aethiops," it should be emphasized, with few exceptions, was applied neither to Egyptians nor to inhabitants of northwest Africa, such as Moors, Numidians, or Carthaginians.
quote:Any inaccuracy with the nose doesn’t undermine the conclusion on sub-Saharan ancestry.
This looks like what they did with Oase 2. Both Tut and Oase 2 do not have wide nasal aperture, but they have reconstructed both of them as having platyrrhine-flat noses. So the Science Museum reconstruction is not accurate at least in the nasal region.
quote:Yes, which gives indication of Tut’s/overall ancient Egyptian sub-Saharan/Horn of Africa affinities and therefore the range of skin tone we can reasonably infer - which wouldn’t include the complexion of the Hawass reconstruction.
He's talking about their crania only (?).
quote:Referring to conventions in Egyptian artwork – which still isn’t properly understood - doesn’t really lend credence to the skin colour chosen for the 2005 depiction of Tut, because the reconstruction is significantly lighter. BTW, it was about 20 years ago when my uncle told me that the ancient Egyptians were black and said that in their paintings they were the same colour as me...again, however, I point out that this is a convention that's not properly understood. (I also hope I'm not an unnatural reddish-brown colour!)
Just look at how most ancient Egyptians artworks are painted. They're contrasted to their southern neighbours who are dark brown, so this comment is not reasonable at all. The modal colour was coppery (reddish-brown). The only place dark brown skin was common in ancient Egypt was at the southern region(s) of Upper Egypt. And compare other countries at the same latitude to see this.
Take a look at a Luschan scale map:
Luschan Scale
quote:6) If you asked a white person to choose a colour for a facial reconstruction of a black person/ African (and told them that they’d win £1000 if they got the correct shade!) do you think they would choose that complexion?
Most white people would consider Tut to be dark, even that image.
quote:From what Anton has said, the nose does look too wide. Regarding the skin colour, if you go to the south of Egypt, you’ll see how dark the people are – the map is not consistent with reality.
They're wrong on the nose, the skin colour too by latitude. Look at the above map I linked. The King Tut reconstruction I posted appears far closer to the pigmentation on that map.
quote:The mask's slipping... No one's asking you to convert to anything. I'm simply picking through the fact that that "bronze" reconstruction is bullshit.
I'm not going to convert though to the "Negroid = Egypt" theory.
quote:Wingspan, standing reach, and height measurements are also forms of metrical data. What I don’t understand is how it’s less relevant that joint measurements. The point I was making is that white Americans, African Americans and ancient Egyptians are all diverse people of many tribes. That is different than say intuits who are more distinctive. With ancient Egyptians there is going to be a range of diversity that overlaps in the same way that it does in the NBA. Thus you can’t look at an odd body type and say that person is a different race.
Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor:
quote:What you posted was your opinion, not metrical data. In other words, it's a wild guess.
Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes:
quote:What I posted was also based on metrical data. Plenty metrical data. If I have someone's standing reach, wingspan, and height it tells me how long their arms are in respect to how wide their shoulders are. The joint radius that Gor is referring to is at best identifying a lanky build. If not please explain. I'm really curious to know how someone's joint radius is independent of their arm's length in respect to height and shoulder width. Is it true that someone can have shorter arms and shoulder width than the average white American but still have a 'tropical build' based on their joints? That would be interesting.
Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor:
I am afraid that tropical limb ratio is a bit more complex, than having a lanky body type. It is actually base on metrical data. SMH
By that way, what does the scene above tell/ talks about?
From what little I can translate of the glyphs and rely on questionable sources this is propaganda against a specific clan or banner as a means to unite people against 'insubordinates' in the region.
But, it's obvoius that you have a problem with the outcome of these papers/ studies.
quote:--Holliday TW, Hilton CE.
In fact, in terms of body shape, the European and the Inuit samples tend to be cold-adapted and tend to be separated in multivariate space from the more tropically adapted Africans, especially those groups from south of the Sahara.
Body proportions of circumpolar peoples as evidenced from skeletal data: Ipiutak and Tigara (Point Hope) versus Kodiak Island Inuit.
quote:--Berry Kemp
Moving to the opposite geographical extremity, the very small sample populations available from northern Egypt from before the 1st Dynasty (Merimda, Maadi and Wadi Digla) turn out to be significantly different from sample populations from early Palestine and Byblos, suggesting a lack of common ancestors over a long time. If there was a south-north cline of variation along the Nile valley it did not, from this limited evidence, continue smoothly on into southern Palestine. The limb-length proportions of males from the Egyptian sites group them with Africans rather than with Europeans.
Ancient Egypt: Anatomy of a Civilisation (, 2005, p.54) [/QB]
quote:Indeed.
Originally posted by Ponsford:
All these debates on King Tut phenotype etc are irrelevant and immaterial,his autosomal Short Tandem Repeats based on 8 loci was published since 2010.This is genetic fingerprinting that is used in Civil and Criminal Jurisdictions.
quote:He's wrong even by his own data: "with regard to specific individuals Dolni Vestonice 14 and Pavlov 1, are more similar to the Europeans" (Trinkaus, 2006). However in his 2011 study he narrowly restricts "European early modern humans" to crania dating > 34,000 BP. Pavlov 1 and Dolni Vestonice 14 are still though among the earliest dated post-crania around 26,000 years old.
As Trinkhaus 2011 notes:
"Finally, all of the European early modern humans show some degree
of tropical linear body proportions, including the Mladec 27 femur as
indicated by biomechanical modeling of its diaphysical robusticity..."
quote:No they don't show that at all. They score intermediate between Africans and Europeans in brachial/crural indices, hardly surprising given their locality (Israel). See the table above.
]"Results indicate that the Qafzeh-Skhul hominids
have African-like, or tropically adapted,
proportions, while those from Amud, Kebara,
Tabun, and Shanidar (Iraq) have more
European-like, or cold-adapted, proportions. This
suggests that there were in fact two distinct
Western Asian populations and that the
Qafzeh-Skhul hominids were likely African in
origin - a result consistent with the
"Replacement" model of modern human origins.
- ---Trenton Holliday (2000) Evolution at the
Crossroads: Modern Human Emergence in Western
Asia. American Anthropologist. New Series,
Vol. 102, No. 1, 54-68
quote:.
Originally posted by Tukuler:
Cranial indices??? Please!Please, no ratios, indexes, or
- Craniometric variables.
- Cranial non-metric traits.
other combining of variables.
Indices are just not racially applicable.
Why? There's too much intra-racial variety.
quote:.
Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor:
The paper by Bulbeck:
Principles Underlying
the Determination of Population Affinity
with Craniometric Data
Page 36
http://www.mankindquarterly.org/samples/Bulbeck.pdf
[...]
quote:--K. Goddea, et al.
Many authors have speculated on Nubian biological evolution. Because of the contact Nubians had with other peoples, migration and/or invasion (biological diffusion) were originally thought to be the biological mechanism for skeletal changes in Nubians. Later, a new hypothesis was put forth, the in situ hypothesis. The new hypothesis postulated that Nubians evolved in situ, without much genetic influence from foreign populations. This study examined 12 Egyptian and Nubian groups in an effort to explore the relationship between the two populations and to test the in situ hypothesis. Data from nine cranial nonmetric traits were assessed for an estimate of biological distance, using Mahalanobis D2 with a tetrachoric matrix. The distance scores were then input into principal coordinates analysis (PCO) to depict the relationships between the two populations. PCO detected 60% of the variation in the first two principal coordinates. A plot of the distance scores revealed only one cluster; the Nubian and Egyptian groups clustered together. The grouping of the Nubians and Egyptians indicates there may have been some sort of gene flow between these groups of Nubians and Egyptians. However, common adaptation to similar environments may also be responsible for this pattern. Although the predominant results in this study appear to support the biological diffusion hypothesis, the in situ hypothesis was not completely negated.
An examination of Nubian and Egyptian biological distances: Support for biological diffusion or in situ development?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19766993
[...]
quote:--Sonia R. Zakrzewski. (2007). Population Continuity
"As a result of their facial prognathism, the Badarian
sample has been described as forming a
morphological cluster with Nubian, Tigrean, and
other southern (or \Negroid") groups (Morant, 1935,
1937; Mukherjee et al., 1955; Nutter, 1958, Strouhal,
1971; Angel, 1972; Keita, 1990). Cranial nonmetric
trait studies have found this group to be similar to
other Egyptians, including much later material (Berry
and Berry, 1967, 1972), but also to be significantly
different from LPD material (Berry et al., 1967).
Similarly, the study of dental nonmetric traits has
suggested that the Badarian population is at the
centroid of Egyptian dental samples (Irish, 2006),
thereby suggesting similarity and hence continuity
across Egyptian time periods. From the central
location of the Badarian samples in Figure 2, the
current study finds the Badarian to be relatively
morphologically close to the centroid of all the
Egyptian samples. The Badarian have been shown to
exhibit
greatest morphological similarity with the temporally
successive EPD (Table 5). Finally, the biological
distinctiveness
of the Badarian from other Egyptian samples has also
been demonstrated (Tables 6 and 7).
These results suggest that the EDyn do form a
distinct morphological pattern. Their overlap with
other Egyptian samples (in PC space, Fig. 2)
suggests that although their morphology is
distinctive, the pattern does overlap with the other
time periods. These results therefore do not support
the Petrie concept of a \Dynastic race" (Petrie, 1939;
Derry, 1956). Instead, the results suggest that the
Egyptian state was not the product of mass
movement of populations into the Egyptian Nile
region, but rather that it was the result of primarily
indigenous development combined with prolonged
small-scale migration, potentially from trade, military,
or other contacts.
This evidence suggests that the process of state
formation itself may have been mainly an indigenous
process, but that it may have occurred in association
with in-migration to the Abydos region of the Nile
Valley. This potential in-migration may have
occurred particularly during the EDyn and OK. A
possible explanation is that the Egyptian state formed
through increasing control of trade and raw
materials, or due to military actions, potentially
associated with the use of the Nile Valley as a
corridor for prolonged small scale movements
through the desert environment.
or Population Change: Formation of the Ancient
Egyptian State. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF
PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 132:501-509)
quote:.
Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor:
quote:--Jean Hiernaux
The oldest remains of Homo sapiens sapiens found in East Africa were associated with an industry having similarities with the Capsian. It has been called Upper Kenyan Capsian, although its derivation from the North African Capsian is far from certain. At Gamble's Cave in Kenya, five human skeletons were associated with a late phase of the industry, Upper Kenya Capsian C, which contains pottery...
The skeletons are of very tall people. They had long, narrow heads, and relatively long, narrow faces. The nose was of medium width; and prognathism, when present, was restricted to the alveolar, or tooth-bearing, region... all their features can be found in several living populations of East Africa, like the Tutsi of Rwanda and Burundi, who are very dark skinned and differ greatly from Europeans in a number of body proportions...
From the foregoing, it is tempting to locate the area of differentiation of these people in the interior of East Africa. There is every reason to believe that they are ancestral to the living 'Elongated East Africans'. Neither of these populations, fossil and modern, should be considered to be closely related to the populations of Europe and western Asia.
[...]
"In sub-Saharan Africa, many anthropological characters show a wide range of population means or frequencies. In some of them, the whole world range is covered in the sub-continent. Here live the shortest and the tallest human populations, the one with the highest and the one with the lowest nose, the one with the thickest and the one with the thinnest lips in the world. In this area, the range of the average nose widths covers 92 per cent of the world range:
only a narrow range of extremely low means are absent from the African record. Means for head diameters cover about 80 per cent of the world range; 60 per cent is the corresponding value for [url=underline]a variable once cherished by physical anthropologists, the cephalic index, or ratio of the head width to head length expressed as a percentage....."
The People of Africa (Peoples of the World Series) (1975)
quote:Wadi Kubbaniya (ca. 17,000–15,000 B.C.)
Originally posted by Gor:
"As to the physical characteristics of the ancient Egyptians, both iconographie and written evidence differentiated between the physical traits of Egyptians and the populations south of Egypt. The art of ancient Egypt frequently painted Egyptian men as reddish brown, women as yellow, and people to the south as black. Ancient Egyptians, like their modern descendants, varied in complexion from a light Mediterranean type, to a light brown [bronze] in Middle Egypt, to a darker brown in southern Egypt."
- Snowden, 1997
"Thousands of sculpted and painted representatives from Egypt as well as hundreds of well preserved bodies from its cemeteries show that the typical physical type was
neither Negro nor Negroid."
- O'Connor, "Ancient Egypt and Black Africa? Early Contacts," Expedition: The Magazine of Archaeology/Anthropology. 14.(1971), 2.
It was Diop pushing the "Negroid-Egypt" theory, which has been debunked... Diop wrote that the modal phenotype in ancient Egypt was Negroid: "...the Egyptians were negroes, [dark-skinned], thick-lipped, kinky-haired and thin legged". This is obviously false, even Keita has shown this in his work.
Also: The ancient Greeks did not consider the ancient Egyptians to be aethiopes ("burnt faced") i.e. black or dark brown skinned either:
quote:- Snowden, 1997
"Aethiops," it should be emphasized, with few exceptions, was applied neither to Egyptians nor to inhabitants of northwest Africa, such as Moors, Numidians, or Carthaginians.
quote:http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/wadi/hd_wadi.htm
In Egypt, the earliest evidence of humans can be recognized only from tools found scattered over an ancient surface, sometimes with hearths nearby. In Wadi Kubbaniya, a dried-up streambed cutting through the Western Desert to the floodplain northwest of Aswan in Upper Egypt, some interesting sites of the kind described above have been recorded. A cluster of Late Paleolithic camps was located in two different topographic zones: on the tops of dunes and the floor of the wadi (streambed) where it enters the valley. Although no signs of houses were found, diverse and sophisticated stone implements for hunting, fishing, and collecting and processing plants were discovered around hearths. Most tools were bladelets made from a local stone called chert that is widely used in tool fabrication. The bones of wild cattle, hartebeest, many types of fish and birds, as well as the occasional hippopotamus have been identified in the occupation layers. Charred remains of plants that the inhabitants consumed, especially tubers, have also been found.
It appears from the zoological and botanical remains at the various sites in this wadi that the two environmental zones were exploited at different times. We know that the dune sites were occupied when the Nile River flooded the wadi because large numbers of fish and migratory bird bones were found at this location. When the water receded, people then moved down onto the silt left behind on the wadi floor and the floodplain, probably following large animals that looked for water there in the dry season. Paleolithic peoples lived at Wadi Kubbaniya for about 2,000 years, exploiting the different environments as the seasons changed. Other ancient camps have been discovered along the Nile from Sudan to the Mediterranean, yielding similar tools and food remains. These sites demonstrate that the early inhabitants of the Nile valley and its nearby deserts had learned how to exploit local environments, developing economic strategies
quote:Robert Bianchi ( 2004). Daily Life of the Nubians. Greenwood Publishing Group
Because they are in fact the same people.
“The ancient Egyptians referred to a region, located south of the third cataract the Nile River, in which Nubians dwelt as Kush.. Within such context, this phrase is not a racial slur. Throughout the history of ancient Egypt there were numerous, well documented instances that celebrate Nubian-Egyptian marriages. A study of these documents, particularly those dated to both the Egyptian New Kingdom (after 1550 B.C.E.) and to Dynasty XXV and early Dynasty XXVI (about 720-640 BCE), reveals that neither spouse nor any of the children of such unions suffered discrimination at the hands of the ancient Egyptians. Indeed such marriages were never an obstacle to social, economic, or political status, provided the individuals concerned conformed to generally accepted Egyptian social standards. Furthermore, at times, certain Nubian practices, such as tattooing for women, and the unisex fashion of wearing earrings, were wholeheartedly embraced by the ancient Egyptians."
(Bianchi, 2004: p. 4)
'It is an extremely difficult task to attempt to describe the Nubians during the course of Egypt's New Kingdom, because their presence appears to have virtually evaporated from the archaeological record.. The result has been described as a wholesale Nubian assimilation into Egyptian society. This assimilation was so complete that it masked all Nubian ethnic identities insofar as archaeological remains are concerned beneath the impenetrable veneer of Egypt's material; culture.. In the Kushite Period, when Nubians ruled as Pharaohs in their own right, the material culture of Dynasty XXV (about 750-655 B.C.E.) was decidedly Egyptian in character.. Nubia's entire landscape up to the region of the Third Cataract was dotted with temples indistinguishable in style and decoration from contemporary temples erected in Egypt. The same observation obtains for the smaller number of typically Egyptian tombs in which these elite Nubian princes were interred.(Bianchi, 2004, p. 99-100)
quote:The negroid is an western invention. Africa is composed of many phynotypes. Wich is well known nowadays. Therefore all these phenotypes found in Africa represent ancient Egypt, (wich is obvious), this was never our problem. And platyrrhine is assured as a broad nose. Not the flatness of it.
Originally posted by Gor:
^^ Also read Snowden's paper to see what he is saying. He does not say 'Negroids' were absent or rare in ancient Egypt, only that they weren't the most common (which is obvious).
The issue for me was never the modal phenotype, but the biological origin of it - which is what I changed my view on (disowning my former hamiticism theories for indigenous African, or rather Saharan). I'm not going to convert though to the "Negroid = Egypt" theory.
quote:http://www.britishmuseum.org/pdf/Kobusiewicz.pdf
"During three seasons of research (in 2000, 2001 and 2003) carried out by the Combined Prehistoric Expedition at Gebel Ramlah in the southern part of the Egyptian Western Desert, three separate Final Neolithic cemeteries were discovered and excavated. Skeletal remains of 67 individuals, comprising both primary and secondary interments, were recovered from 32 discrete burial pits. Numerous grave goods were found, including lithics, pottery and ground stone objects, as well as items of personal adornment, pigments, shells and sheets of mica. Imports from distant areas prove far-reaching contacts.
Analysis of the finds sheds important light on the burial rituals and social conditions of the Final Neolithic cattle keepers inhabiting Ramlah Playa. This community, dated to the mid-fifth millennium B.C. (calibrated), was composed of a phenotypically diverse population derived from both North and sub-Saharan Africa. There were no indications of social differentiation. The deteriorating climatic conditions probably forced these people to migrate toward the Nile Valley where they undoubtedly contributed to the birth of ancient Egyptian civilization."
quote:You keep posting/ imposing/ juxtaposing your opinion. Why?
Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes:
quote:Wingspan, standing reach, and height measurements are also forms of metrical data. What I don’t understand is how it’s less relevant that joint measurements. The point I was making is that white Americans, African Americans and ancient Egyptians are all diverse people of many tribes. That is different than say intuits who are more distinctive. With ancient Egyptians there is going to be a range of diversity that overlaps in the same way that it does in the NBA. Thus you can’t look at an odd body type and say that person is a different race. [/QB]
Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor:
quote:What you posted was your opinion, not metrical data. In other words, it's a wild guess.
Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes:
quote:What I posted was also based on metrical data. Plenty metrical data. If I have someone's standing reach, wingspan, and height it tells me how long their arms are in respect to how wide their shoulders are. The joint radius that Gor is referring to is at best identifying a lanky build. If not please explain. I'm really curious to know how someone's joint radius is independent of their arm's length in respect to height and shoulder width. Is it true that someone can have shorter arms and shoulder width than the average white American but still have a 'tropical build' based on their joints? That would be interesting.
Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor:
I am afraid that tropical limb ratio is a bit more complex, than having a lanky body type. It is actually base on metrical data. SMH
By that way, what does the scene above tell/ talks about?
From what little I can translate of the glyphs and rely on questionable sources this is propaganda against a specific clan or banner as a means to unite people against 'insubordinates' in the region.
But, it's obvoius that you have a problem with the outcome of these papers/ studies.
quote:--Holliday TW, Hilton CE.
In fact, in terms of body shape, the European and the Inuit samples tend to be cold-adapted and tend to be separated in multivariate space from the more tropically adapted Africans, especially those groups from south of the Sahara.
Body proportions of circumpolar peoples as evidenced from skeletal data: Ipiutak and Tigara (Point Hope) versus Kodiak Island Inuit.
quote:--Berry Kemp
Moving to the opposite geographical extremity, the very small sample populations available from northern Egypt from before the 1st Dynasty (Merimda, Maadi and Wadi Digla) turn out to be significantly different from sample populations from early Palestine and Byblos, suggesting a lack of common ancestors over a long time. If there was a south-north cline of variation along the Nile valley it did not, from this limited evidence, continue smoothly on into southern Palestine. The limb-length proportions of males from the Egyptian sites group them with Africans rather than with Europeans.
Ancient Egypt: Anatomy of a Civilisation (, 2005, p.54)
quote:T. W. Holliday* 2013
Bivariate analyses distinguish Jebel Sahaba from European and circumpolar samples, but do not tend to segregate them from recent North or sub-Saharan African samples
quote:--Michelle H. Raxter1,*, Christopher B. Ruff2, Ayman Azab3, Moushira Erfan3, Muhammad Soliman3 andAly El-Sawaf3
Trotter and Gleser's (Trotter and Gleser: Am J Phys Anthropol 10 (1952) 469–514; Trotter and Gleser: Am J Phys Anthropol 16 (1958) 79–123) long bone formulae for US Blacks or derivations thereof (Robins and Shute: Hum Evol 1 (1986) 313–324) have been previously used to estimate the stature of ancient Egyptians. However, limb length to stature proportions differ between human populations; consequently, the most accurate mathematical stature estimates will be obtained when the population being examined is as similar as possible in proportions to the population used to create the equations. The purpose of this study was to create new stature regression formulae based on direct reconstructions of stature in ancient Egyptians and assess their accuracy in comparison to other stature estimation methods. We also compare Egyptian body proportions to those of modern American Blacks and Whites. Living stature estimates were derived using a revised Fully anatomical method (Raxter et al.: Am J Phys Anthropol 130 (2006) 374–384). Long bone stature regression equations were then derived for each sex. Our results confirm that, although ancient Egyptians are closer in body proportion to modern American Blacks than they are to American Whites, proportions in Blacks and Egyptians are not identical. The newly generated Egyptian-based stature regression formulae have standard errors of estimate of 1.9–4.2 cm. All mean directional differences are less than 0.4% compared to anatomically estimated stature, while results using previous formulae are more variable, with mean directional biases varying between 0.2% and 1.1%, tibial and radial estimates being the most biased. There is no evidence for significant variation in proportions among temporal or social groupings; thus, the new formulae may be broadly applicable to ancient Egyptian remains.
quote:The bronze complexion makes perfect sense, since his remains were found in the South, at Valley Of Kings.
Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes:
The Bronze skin recreation of Tut?
quote:Go back and look. This is what I posted
Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor:
[QB]
You keep posting/ imposing/ juxtaposing your opinion. Why?
quote:--Holliday TW.
Among recent humans brachial and crural indices are positively correlated with mean annual temperature, such that high indices are found in tropical groups. However, despite inhabiting glacial Europe, the Upper Paleolithic Europeans possessed high indices, prompting Trinkaus (1981) to argue for gene flow from warmer regions associated with modern human emergence in Europe. In contrast, Frayer et al. (1993) point out that Late Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic Europeans should not exhibit tropically-adapted limb proportions, since, even assuming replacement, their ancestors had experienced cold stress in glacial Europe for at least 12 millennia. This study investigates three questions tied to the brachial and crural indices among Late Pleistocene and recent humans. First, which limb segments (either proximal or distal) are primarily responsible for variation in brachial and crural indices? Second, are these indices reflective of overall limb elongation? And finally, do the Late Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic Europeans retain relatively and/or absolutely long limbs? Results indicate that in the lower limb, the distal limb segment contributes most of the variability to intralimb proportions, while in the upper limb the proximal and distal limb segments appear to be equally variable. Additionally, brachial and crural indices do not appear to be a good measure of overall limb length, and thus, while the Late Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic humans have significantly higher (i.e., tropically-adapted) brachial and crural indices than do recent Europeans, they also have shorter (i.e., cold-adapted) limbs.
The somewhat paradoxical retention of "tropical" indices in the context of more "cold-adapted" limb length is best explained as evidence for Replacement in the European Late Pleistocene, followed by gradual cold adaptation in glacial Europe.
quote:I've read this excerpt before and I agree with
Originally posted by Gor:
quote:This issue has plagued FORDISC. There are different arguments - one supporting few variables, the other many, or more. We see the same thing with Upper Palaeolithic European skulls: few or less variables come out Zulu, or Bushman, but 40+, come out Norse from Howells reference bank:
Originally posted by Swenet:
[QB] @Gor
What you tend to see with craniometric samples
with no controls (i.e. a larger set of European
and African comparative samples) is that (pre)
dynastic Nile Valley groups will join non-African
dendrogram branches. Without said larger context
the Giza sample will also group with Ethiopians.
As for the Giza sample, it has been compared to
Greeks and Italians before, along with Egyptian,
Nubian and Somali samples. Results in table 5.
The Late Dynastic Giza sample is somewhat of an
enigma. It has been known to group with the
Kerma sample before Egyptian samples in non-
metric analysis and in geometric morphometric
analysis. However, in normal metric analyses
with a modest amount of variables, you'll find
that they typically plot in between inner African
populations and (northern) Europeans. But when
you increase the amount of variables to ~50 as in
Zakrzewski 2002, they start behaving funny and
can be separated from earlier Nile Valley groups
with great ease. This is why I suspect that
analyses with large numbers of variables may be
more prone to inflating certain inter-sample
differences that wouldn't be emphasized as much
in analyses with a more simple set up.
quote:- Jantz and Owsley (2003)
those skulls expressing Norse affinity are the most complete and have the highest number of measurements (x̄ = 50.8), while those expressing affinity to African populations (Bushman or Zulu) are the most incomplete, averaging just 16.8 measurements per skull. Use of highly incomplete or reconstructed crania may not yield a good estimate of their morphometric affinities. When one considers only those crania with 40 or more measurements, a majority express European affinity.
quote:The same way he clusters with other Africans. His wingspan is much longer than his height. He's quite lanky. He's like Menkare after the nose job.
Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor:
What has the above to do with tropical limb- and body ratio index??? How does this let Coby Karl cluster with ancient Egyptians?
quote:--Holliday TW.
Brachial and crural indices of European late Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic humans.
Among recent humans brachial and crural indices are positively correlated with mean annual temperature, such that high indices are found in tropical groups. However, despite inhabiting glacial Europe, the Upper Paleolithic Europeans possessed high indices, prompting Trinkaus (1981) to argue for gene flow from warmer regions associated with modern human emergence in Europe. In contrast, Frayer et al. (1993) point out that Late Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic Europeans should not exhibit tropically-adapted limb proportions, since, even assuming replacement, their ancestors had experienced cold stress in glacial Europe for at least 12 millennia. This study investigates three questions tied to the brachial and crural indices among Late Pleistocene and recent humans. First, which limb segments (either proximal or distal) are primarily responsible for variation in brachial and crural indices? Second, are these indices reflective of overall limb elongation? And finally, do the Late Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic Europeans retain relatively and/or absolutely long limbs? Results indicate that in the lower limb, the distal limb segment contributes most of the variability to intralimb proportions, while in the upper limb the proximal and distal limb segments appear to be equally variable. Additionally, brachial and crural indices do not appear to be a good measure of overall limb length, and thus, while the Late Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic humans have significantly higher (i.e., tropically-adapted) brachial and crural indices than do recent Europeans, they also have shorter (i.e., cold-adapted) limbs.
The somewhat paradoxical retention of "tropical" indices in the context of more "cold-adapted" limb length is best explained as evidence for Replacement in the European Late Pleistocene, followed by gradual cold adaptation in glacial Europe.
quote:You're missing the point, gramps, re: modern West
Originally posted by xyyman:
Good God!. Will you ever stop? WTF are you talking about? The year is 2014, this is the age of more accurate tools. Modern Europeans do NOT cluster with UP West Eurasians. La Brana did NOT carry EEF genetically!!!! Don’t you get the significance? Modern “Arabians” genetically are NOT related to ANE. Will someone put this man out his misery? Take away the keyboard. Cass is old school. He relies on science that is over 100years old. His belief is dated. Haven’t you read all the RECENT papers on the relationship between Africans, Europeans and Asians?(Lazaridis, DNATribes, Fu, Luelza-Fox etc ALL modern reports proposes that Paleolithic Europeans clusters with ancient East Asians. Eg Onge, Andaman Islanders, Australians etc. They were replaced by EEF about 5000BC. Good god man. Give it up!
Will his handlers give him more material….. a better script……please.
Quote:
IN MY VIEW, modern West Eurasians cluster more with UP West Eurasians when you up the amount of variables, because the latter are ancestral to the former and so you'd expect a lot of retention of less conspicuous commonalities. As you increase the amount of variables,
quote:Based on this study limb length is more adaptive than brachial and crural indicies. I would have thought they were the same thing. This suggest that those NBAdraft measurements are more relevant not less. It validates my point. You cant identify Ramses II's race by measuring his bones.
Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes:
quote:The same way he clusters with other Africans. His wingspan is much longer than his height. He's quite lanky. He's like Menkare after the nose job.
Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor:
What has the above to do with tropical limb- and body ratio index??? How does this let Coby Karl cluster with ancient Egyptians?
My initial point was - unless that joint ratio study that Gor was quoting is for whatever reason a more accurate indicator of what someone's race is you are going to have exceptions. For populations its sound for individuals its flawed.
quote:--Holliday TW.
Brachial and crural indices of European late Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic humans.
Among recent humans brachial and crural indices are positively correlated with mean annual temperature, such that high indices are found in tropical groups. However, despite inhabiting glacial Europe, the Upper Paleolithic Europeans possessed high indices, prompting Trinkaus (1981) to argue for gene flow from warmer regions associated with modern human emergence in Europe. In contrast, Frayer et al. (1993) point out that Late Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic Europeans should not exhibit tropically-adapted limb proportions, since, even assuming replacement, their ancestors had experienced cold stress in glacial Europe for at least 12 millennia. This study investigates three questions tied to the brachial and crural indices among Late Pleistocene and recent humans. First, which limb segments (either proximal or distal) are primarily responsible for variation in brachial and crural indices? Second, are these indices reflective of overall limb elongation? And finally, do the Late Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic Europeans retain relatively and/or absolutely long limbs? Results indicate that in the lower limb, the distal limb segment contributes most of the variability to intralimb proportions, while in the upper limb the proximal and distal limb segments appear to be equally variable. Additionally, brachial and crural indices do not appear to be a good measure of overall limb length, and thus, while the Late Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic humans have significantly higher (i.e., tropically-adapted) brachial and crural indices than do recent Europeans, they also have shorter (i.e., cold-adapted) limbs.
The somewhat paradoxical retention of "tropical" indices in the context of more "cold-adapted" limb length is best explained as evidence for Replacement in the European Late Pleistocene, followed by gradual cold adaptation in glacial Europe.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10222169
quote:Just what I expected. Just lip service and mouthing
Originally posted by xyyman:
Pure entertainment.
quote:will you write like a normal person
Originally posted by Swenet:
when you up the amount of
variables, because the latter are ancestral to
the former and so you'd expect a lot of retention
of less conspicuous commonalities....
quote:.
Originally posted by Gor:
quote:Studies estimate human individuals are overall 99.9% identical in genotype. Of that remaining 0.1%, inter-individual differences account for 90%, while 10% is found between supra-individuals (populations). The latter is mirrored in phenotype. So we're looking at 0.01% of biological variation that correlates with geography. That 0.01% still exists, so no physical anthropologist denies there is a geographical structure to craniometrics, even if it is very weak. You can still find large frequency differentials in certain traits between populations, hence different means or averages. However the way this is structured fits an isolation by distance population model as opposed to race clustering. This is why Howells (1995) gave up race, but argued for populations instead of just clines. In response to Livingstone who wrote "there are no races, there are only clines", Howell's remarked: "there are no races, there are only populations".
Originally posted by Tukuler:
Late, but about some earlier posts
Cranial indices??? Please!
Craniometric variables.
Cranial non-metric traits.
Please, no ratios, indexes, or
other combining of variables.
Dixon's work on indices made
Britain ⅓ D-H-P "proto-negroid"
(iirc, no longer owning the book).
Indices are just not racially applicable.
Why? There's too much intra-racial variety.
quote:Take another look.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
http://guardians.net/hawass/articles/King_Tut_CATscan.htm
TUTANKHAMUN MUMMY AND CT SCAN
Is the nasal aperture "wide" ?
I don't know
quote:The man was very sick and disfigured, look at his pathologies. So I think the whole 'race issue' over Tut is pretty silly anyway. This is why you probably didn't get a reply from that email.
Originally posted by tropicals redacted:
quote:The mask's slipping... No one's asking you to convert to anything. I'm simply picking through the fact that that "bronze" reconstruction is bullshit.
I'm not going to convert though to the "Negroid = Egypt" theory.
If the teams that worked on Tut 2005 were entered into a competition to do a reconstruction of a skull of a modern person with exactly the same cranial characteristics as Tut, with the entries being compared to a photo of the subject in life, the result/skin colour would be markedly different.
Especially if the prize money were say, oooh, £1m per winning team member!
What do you think, Cass?
quote:No it never is. This is what you, Claus and other pan-Africanists are doing: trying to sink all inter-regional mean cranial complexes in Africa into one cluster which is basically regurgitating Linneaus' 18th century Homo afer.
Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
The term "negroids" is sometimes simply another label for
tropically adapted African.
quote:--Pan African Studies Department, California State University, Northridge, 1998
In reference to cranial index (cranial length/cranial breadth x 100) he states: "The Black skull type is dolichocranic in West Africa, dolichocranic to mesocranic in East Africa, and mesocranic to brachycranic in South Africa. The American Black ...
quote:There is no such thing as a "Nilotid" or "Pygmid"
Originally posted by Gor:
quote:No it never is. This is what you, Claus and other pan-Africanists are doing: trying to sink all inter-regional mean cranial complexes in Africa into one cluster which is basically regurgitating Linneaus' 18th century Homo afer.
Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
The term "negroids" is sometimes simply another label for
tropically adapted African.
Did Hiernaux (1975) ever cluster "elongated africans" (ethiopids) "broad africans" (negroids), Pygmids and nilotids together? No.
quote:--Brace 2005
The interbreeding of the incoming Neolithic
people with the in situ foragers diluted the
Sub-Saharan traces that may have come with the
Neolithic spread so that no discoverable element of
that remained.
quote:Taking another look at the shriveled skin on an ancient corpse is irrelevant.
Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor:
Take another look.
quote:whenever xyyman hears the word "Luhya" , "Sardinians" or "Saami" it has a psychedelic effect on his brain
Originally posted by Swenet:
Yeah, damn right, you're sorry you butted in. Lol.
Of course you are sorry.
Physical affinities of EEF:
quote:--Brace 2005
The interbreeding of the incoming Neolithic
people with the in situ foragers diluted the
Sub-Saharan traces that may have come with the
Neolithic spread so that no discoverable element of
that remained.
EEF are Luhya? Lol. Mushrooms are a hellova drug!
quote:They're mathematical means. Yes, no one has ever seen a statistical abstraction walk down the street... I'm not the one claiming these oids are real dumbass. You however cling to a discredited typological view of "Africans". The latter you treat as some sort of natural biological grouping or taxon like Linnaeus' Homo Afer. Perhaps this quote will help:
Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
There is no such thing as a "Nilotid" or "Pygmid"
or all the other bogus classifications you keep
coming up with. What next, "Swedids" for Swedes?
quote:Err no. It is studies on Sub-Sahara Africa arguing that populations there show the highest mean craniometric variation. A different claim entirely to believing Africans have more variation than non-Africans.
And Africa has the highest cranial variation in the world- ALL that diversity falls makes up Africans.
quote:Europeans and East Asians have virtually the "full range of diversity" too. You've confused this with highest mean variation, see above.
"Inter-regional" or
"regional"- doesn't make a dimes bit of diff- they are all
African with the full range of diversity.
quote:No actually you fail again. You are the most dishonest poster on this forum. Once you lose you try to bury the thread with those crappy images you create on windows-paint. And you even manipulate or distort the data in them.
Below,
your "Pygmids", as a tropically adapted people, cluster closer
to Egyptians than your cold climate, "Causicadids". You fail again.
quote:Dude, the skin is indeed shriveled. And to get an exact measurement we need science, indeed. But from a visual perspective we can already see that the nasal opening is wide. Not long/ small and narrow.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Taking another look at the shriveled skin on an ancient corpse is irrelevant.
Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor:
Take another look.
These things are determined by scientific measurements
quote:Zaharan & Xyyman = dumb and dumber.
Originally posted by Swenet:
Okay, I see my last post has been deleted. That's
all I wanted to see.
quote:Perhaps you miss their point.
Originally posted by Gor:
quote:Zaharan & Xyyman = dumb and dumber.
Originally posted by Swenet:
Okay, I see my last post has been deleted. That's
all I wanted to see.
quote:--Sarah Tishkoff, Ph.D
For many of the individuals for which we have obtained DNA, we also collected phenotype data for traits likely to play a role in adaptation, some of which demonstrate a complex pattern of inheritance and are likely influenced by multiple loci and environmental factors. In addition to case/control analyses of variation at candidate genes, we are using whole-genome association studies to identify novel genes that are associated with these traits. Together with collaborators, we are also developing methods for mapping complex traits (including disease) in highly structured African populations.
quote:--Sarah Tishkoff, Ph.D
Africa is the birthplace of modern humans, and is the source of the geographic expansion of ancestral populations into other regions of the world.
Indigenous Africans are characterized by high levels of genetic diversity within and between populations. The pattern of genetic variation in these populations has been shaped by demographic events occurring over the last 200,000 years.
The dramatic variation in climate, diet, and exposure to infectious disease across the continent has also resulted in novel genetic and phenotypic adaptations in extant Africans.
This review summarizes some recent advances in our understanding of the demographic history and selective pressures that have influenced levels and patterns of diversity in African populations.
Africa not only has the highest levels of human genetic variation in the world but also contains a considerable amount of linguistic, environmental and cultural diversity. For example, more than 2,000 distinct ethno-linguistic groups, representing nearly a third of the world’s languages, currently exist in Africa
The timing and duration of some of these demographic events were often correlated with known major environmental changes and/or cultural developments in Africa [6].
A number of novel genetic and phenotypic adaptations have also evolved in Africans in response to dramatic variation in environment, diet, and exposure to infectious disease across the continent.
In some cases, these adaptations have occurred in the last several thousand years, exemplifying the ongoing evolution of human populations.
Thus, present-day patterns of variation in African genomes are a product of both demographic and selective events.
quote:I'm not a dude, secondly the frontal view is the relevant view not the 3/4 view you keep showing.
Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor:
Dude, the skin is indeed shriveled. And to get an exact measurement we need science, indeed. But from a visual perspective we can already see that the nasal opening is wide. Not long/ small and narrow. [/QB]
quote:Well, I gave you a rather full
Originally posted by Gor:
quote:I AM focusing on the nose holes at this Point. These are wide, not "long and narrow". You can go back and forth, but the fact remains that the "nose holes" are rond and wide. I how you understand it now.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:I'm not a dude, secondly the frontal view is the relevant view not the 3/4 view you keep showing.
Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor:
Dude, the skin is indeed shriveled. And to get an exact measurement we need science, indeed. But from a visual perspective we can already see that the nasal opening is wide. Not long/ small and narrow.
andl what persons not trained in anthropology or forensics think they "already can see" is irrelevant [/QB]
quote:You posted you think the modal skin hue in ancient Egypt was dark brown, I claim it was bronze/copper-brown. What is the big deal here?
Originally posted by tropicals redacted:
So the debate becomes silly and the evidence/conclusions we have become irrelevant now that your arguments have unraveled?
quote:North Africans are predominantly a lighter brown skin colour than Sub-Saharan Africans.
And the geneticist didn't respond because they're too 'sensible' to answer whether, in they're view, Tut, an indigenous African, was more likely to have skin tone that fell within an African or European range?
quote:Yes, and there are also biased scientists who are not from Europe, including Afrocentrists. Clyde Winters has a PhD and calls himself a "Dr", but about everything he posts on this forum is his own dogma, lies and propaganda, not factual.
You should remember that you said:
" There may indeed be biased ethnocentric European scientists"...
quote:You jumped on the "tropical" bandwagon, and like Zaharan you also refuse to accept there is no African phenotype/genotype cluster. And are you claiming you physically resemble (in your opinion) the modal phenotype of the ancient Egyptians?
1) Can you provide evidence that I'm doing this and that I'm a pan-Africanist?
quote:Yea, but there's very little data to go on.
2)Do you have anything which states that it does?
Anton pointed out she thought the nose was more North African, but still said that the skull overall spoke fairly strongly of African origins.
quote:No, not skin tone though. And Horner's do not cluster with "broad Africans"/Negroids anyway. This is my simple point - there is no African cluster, nor Sub-Saharan African, and so on.
Yes, which gives indication of Tut’s/overall ancient Egyptian sub-Saharan/Horn of Africa affinities and therefore the range of skin tone we can reasonably infer - which wouldn’t include the complexion of the Hawass reconstruction.
quote:What was the Hawass reconstruction? The Science Museum source you posted? If so, obviously no.
4) Is it not the case that most depictions of Egyptians are darker than the Hawass reconstruction?
quote:No, but the depictions show him to be coppery or reddish brown, not dark-brown like chocolate.
Do you know of any ancient depictions of Tut that are as light as the 2005 model?
quote:What is your point here?
7) If you asked a white person to choose a colour for a facial reconstruction of a black person/ African (and told them that they’d win £1000 if they got the correct shade!) do you think they would choose that complexion?
quote:That^ skin tone is obviously very different to this:
This to me is dark skinned :
The New Face of King Tut National Geographic
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/ae/National_Geographic_-_King_Tut_face.jpg
quote:You didn't answer my questions on the Lushcan scale:
My claim is supported by the latitude (luscan-scale distribution) and ancient artwork.
quote:Nor the question the colour used for Tut on his own throne:
6) Regarding the Luschan scale, how long would a literally black skinned person have to be resident in those various zones to depigment to the colours predicted? What I'm asking is whether populations have been sufficiently static in some of those narrow zones for that map to work.
quote:https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4066/4715051091_e6983c9ec4.jpg
8) What did you make of the skin color used for Tut on his throne?
quote:Seems clear that you're not properly engaging with this because your points are have been dismantled - what a glib, nonsensical answer. They were asked whether they thought Tut would be more likely to have had a range of skin tone found in Europeans or Africans, and they clammed up.
And the geneticist didn't respond because they're too 'sensible' to answer whether, in they're view, Tut, an indigenous African, was more likely to have skin tone that fell within an African or European range?
North Africans are predominantly a lighter brown skin colour than Sub-Saharan Africans.
quote:Relevance? Oh, yeah, there isn't any. Now you're back into ES troll mode.
You should remember that you said:
" There may indeed be biased ethnocentric European scientists"...
Yes, and there are also biased scientists who are not from Europe, including Afrocentrists. Clyde Winters has a PhD and calls himself a "Dr", but about everything he posts on this forum is his own dogma, lies and propaganda, not factual.
quote:More evasion. Someone qualified who's been up close with the skull and gives an analysis you, someone with a documented history of sick racist internet activity, don't like and you say that there's "very little data to go on."
1) Can you provide evidence that I'm doing this and that I'm a pan-Africanist?
You jumped on the "tropical" bandwagon, and like Zaharan you also refuse to accept there is no African phenotype/genotype cluster. And are you claiming you physically resemble (in your opinion) the modal phenotype of the ancient Egyptians?
So anyone who accepts the idea of a tropical body plan in ancient Egyptians is a pan-Africanist? That would apparently make you one...Never said I resemble the modal phenotype of the ancient Egyptians. Go back and read the post.
[QUOTE]
Anton pointed out she thought the nose was more North African, but still said that the skull overall spoke fairly strongly of African origins.
Yea, but there's very little data to go on.
quote:More crap. So Horner's don't have dark skin more readily seen in African populations? More cynical expedient rubbish.
Yes, which gives indication of Tut’s/overall ancient Egyptian sub-Saharan/Horn of Africa affinities and therefore the range of skin tone we can reasonably infer - which wouldn’t include the complexion of the Hawass reconstruction.
No, not skin tone though. And Horner's do not cluster with "broad Africans"/Negroids anyway. This is my simple point - there is no African cluster, nor Sub-Saharan African, and so on.
quote:Like you don't know:
) Is it not the case that most depictions of Egyptians are darker than the Hawass reconstruction?
What was the Hawass reconstruction? The Science Museum source you posted? If so, obviously no.
quote:Relevance? We're talking about the skin tone of the Hawass reconstruction (and the one which have rise to this thread.)
Do you know of any ancient depictions of Tut that are as light as the 2005 model?
No, but the depictions show him to be coppery or reddish brown, not dark-brown like chocolate.
quote:Let me spell it out for you. You'd said:
7) If you asked a white person to choose a colour for a facial reconstruction of a black person/ African (and told them that they’d win £1000 if they got the correct shade!) do you think they would choose that complexion?
What is your point here?
quote:And:
I guess what someone considers dark or light is to some degree relative to their own skin tone. I don't personally see this reconstruction as a 'White Tut', he's basically a bronze colour, but someone who has darker brown skin probably considers this to be light in comparison.
quote:Again, my question:
I notice with your image, you chose the 'darkest', or at least one of the darkest images available. Compare with this:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/05/images/051005_tutsface.jpg
4)Why did you select the one you did?
Most white people would consider Tut to be dark, even that image.
quote:I don't think that Luschan-scale map necessarily shows what the optimal skin color for each latitude would be. It merely shows what the modal skin colors of people currently inhabiting a region are. Notice that the tropical Americas on your map don't have the same skin tone range as Africa, which reflects the Native American inhabitants' ultimate origin in northeastern Asia. Ergo, your map is not taking recent migrations and admixture into account.
Originally posted by Gor:
My claim is supported by the latitude (luscan-scale distribution) and ancient artwork.
quote:Again, I would ask how long people would need to be resident for in those zones to gain those skin colours, and to take into account the South-North movement of populations from tropical Africa into Egypt.
I don't think that Luschan-scale map necessarily shows what the optimal skin color for each latitude would be. It merely shows what the modal skin colors of people currently inhabiting a region are. Notice that the tropical Americas on your map don't have the same skin tone range as Africa, which reflects the Native American inhabitants' ultimate origin in northeastern Asia. Ergo, your map is not taking recent migrations and admixture into account.
This map on the other hand was devised by Nina Jablonksi as a prediction of what the optimal skin color for each latitude would be, absent all those migrations.
quote:And this:
Tut had a CI of 83.9 (Hawass et al. 2010). We also know this bachycephaly was not pathological.
quote:With this?:
If a skull is brachycephalic it is highly unlikely (unless it is pathological) to infer Sub-Saharan African ancestry.
quote:
the skull overall, including aspects of the face spoke fairly strongly of his African origins
quote:Yes they are, but to someone with pale/white skin, both are dark. It seems strange that you think there is a 'white' Tut reconstruction. If there was - Nordicists certainly would have used it by now. But its obviously too dark for them.
Originally posted by tropicals redacted:
That^ skin tone is obviously very different to this:
quote:"From known cases of population expansion, it can be seen that the processes of natural selection that cause skin pigmentation to vary work at very slow rates. For instance, the tropical American Indians are not reported to be noticeably darker than other Native Americans after a settlement periods of perhaps 15,000 years, and yet it is clear from Old world observations that tropical latitudes have certainly selected for darker skins over much longer time spans." (Bellwood, 2007)
6) Regarding the Luschan scale, how long would a literally black skinned person have to be resident in those various zones to depigment to the colours predicted? What I'm asking is whether populations have been sufficiently static in some of those narrow zones for that map to work.
quote:That falls within the "coppery" (reddish-brown) range I was talking about, probably at the darker end of the spectrum though. But its still far lighter than this.
Nor the question the colour used for Tut on his own throne
quote:My point is that you should have asked North vs. Sub-Saharan African, not European vs. African.
Seems clear that you're not properly engaging with this because your points are have been dismantled - what a glib, nonsensical answer. They were asked whether they thought Tut would be more likely to have had a range of skin tone found in Europeans or Africans, and they clammed up.
quote:Relevance: you only think white people are racist or ethnocentric. DHDoxy and other posters on this forum have challenged you before on this: extreme racist material posted by black posters, you don't report or consider offensive. Yet you are known to go berserk if a white person merely posts a mild racial comment in comparison.
Relevance? Oh, yeah, there isn't any. Now you're back into ES troll mode.
quote:There are non-Africans with 'tropically adapted' limbs, I never made a big thing about it. The tropics is not confined to Africa. Zaharan however uses this "tropical African" nonsense, and you seem to have adopted it (look at name).
So anyone who accepts the idea of a tropical body plan in ancient Egyptians is a pan-Africanist? That would apparently make you one...Never said I resemble the modal phenotype of the ancient Egyptians. Go back and read the post.
quote:There are very few measurements, which means precisely what I stated. All you have done is appeal to authority. And lol @ "sick racist internet activity". This is coming from you: a pervert who wrote on his 18th birthday he had ordered white female strippers, creates filthy threads across the internet "why do white women pay for sex in Jamaica", and how you once arrived at a holiday-cottage in rural England to find a blonde Barbie doll which you had a family racial debate over because it wasn't black with an afro. Yes, you're really 'normal' on race dude.
More evasion. Someone qualified who's been up close with the skull and gives an analysis you, someone with a documented history of sick racist internet activity, don't like and you say that there's "very little data to go on."
There's no dirt like yours logged on my internet-history, I just changed my position on typology and so forth after reading more literature. quote:I meant craniometrics.
More crap. So Horner's don't have dark skin more readily seen in African populations? More cynical expedient rubbish.
quote:If you meant Tut, probably yes. black person/African - no.
Again, my question:
If you asked a white person to choose a colour for a facial reconstruction of a black person/ African (and told them that they’d win £1000 if they got the correct shade!) do you think they would choose that complexion? (The one shown on the National Geographic reconstruction.)
quote:The big deal here is that ancient Egyptians eventually originated at the South, as they gradually moved up the Nile. Chronologically, Kerma, Naqada I, II, III, at the latter KMT.
Originally posted by Gor:
quote:You posted you think the modal skin hue in ancient Egypt was dark brown, I claim it was bronze/copper-brown. What is the big deal here?
Originally posted by tropicals redacted:
So the debate becomes silly and the evidence/conclusions we have become irrelevant now that your arguments have unraveled?
My claim is supported by the latitude (luscan-scale distribution) and ancient artwork.
quote:--Mae Goder-Goldberger
There is clear evidence of lithic technological variability in Middle Paleolithic (MP) assemblages along the Nile valley and in adjacent desert areas. One of the identified variants is the Khormusan, the type-site of which, Site 1017, is located north of the Nile's Second Cataract. The industry has two distinctive characteristics that set it apart from other MP industries within its vicinity. One is the use of a wide variety of raw materials; the second is an apparent correlation between raw material and technology used, suggesting a cultural aspect to raw material management. Stratigraphically, site 1017 is situated within the Dibeira-Jer formation which represents an aggradation stage of the Nile and contains sediments originating from the Ethiopian Highlands. While it has previously been suggested that the site dates to sometime before 42.5 ka, the Dibeira-Jer formation can plausibly be correlated with Nile alluvial sediments in northern Sudan recently dated to 83 ± 24 ka (MIS 5a). This stage coincides with the 81 ka age of sapropel S3, indicating higher Nile flow and stronger monsoon rainfall at these times.
Other sites which reflect similar raw material variability and technological traditions are the BNS and KHS sites in the Omo Kibish Formation (Ethiopia) dated to ∼100 ka and ∼190 ka respectively. Based on a lithic comparative study conducted, it is suggested that site 1017 can be seen as representing behavioral patterns which are indicative of East African Middle Stone Age (MSA) technology, adding support to the hypothesis that the Nile Valley was an important dispersal route used by modern humans prior to the long cooling and dry trend beginning with the onset of MIS 4. Techo-typological comparison of the assemblages from the Khormusan sites with other Middle Paleolithic sites from Nubia and East Africa is used to assess the possibility of tracing the dispersal of technological traits across the landscape and through time.
quote:-- Jeffrey Rose
Evidence for a hunter-gatherer range-expansion is indicated by the site of Station One in the northern Sudan, a surface scatter of chipped stone debris systematically collected almost 40 years ago, though not studied until present. Based on technological and typological correlates in East Africa, the predominant use of quartz pebbles for raw material, and the production of small bifacial tools, the site can be classified as Middle Stone Age. While often appearing in East African assemblages, quartz was rarely used in Nubia, where ferrocrete sandstone and Nile pebble were predominantly used by all other Middle Palaeolithic/Middle Stone Age populations. Additionally, façonnage reduction is characteristic of lithic technology in East Africa in the late Middle Stone Age, while Middle Palaeolithic industries in the Nile Valley display only core reduction. It is proposed this assemblage represents a range-expansion of Middle Stone Age hunter-gatherers from East Africa during an Upper Pleistocene pluvial.
[...]
Studies of mitochondrial DNA suggest that all mod- ern humans are derived from a common ancestral group that was living in sub-Saharan Africa between 200,000 and 100,000 years ago (Cann et al. 1987; Vigi- lant et al. 1991; Horai et al. 1995; Quintana-Murci et al. 1999; Ingman et al. 2000). This ‘Out of Africa’ model posits multiple dispersals via the Arabian (Tchernov 1992; Ronen & Weinstein-Evron 2000; Rose 2000; Stringer 2000; Rose 2004) and/or Levantine corridors (Bar-Yosef 1987; 1994; 2000; Van Peer 1998) between 110,000 and 50,000 BP, which places these events in the latter half of the Middle Palaeolithic (henceforth MP)/Middle Stone Age (henceforth MSA).
It is reasonable to assume if any population expanded from East Africa to Northeast Africa, and subsequently into the Levant, they would have brought with them the lithic technology from whence they came. There are scattered assemblages from the Sudan that are characteristic of the Sangoan (e.g. Arkell 1949; Guichard & Guichard 1965), indicating some degree of technological continuity between
Central and Northeast Africa during the late Early Stone Age (henceforth ESA).
To date, however, there has been no convincing archaeological evidence to suggest inter-regional af- finities during the MSA between East Africa and Northeast Africa. On the contrary, MP industries of Sudan (e.g. Marks 1968a,b) are technologically and typologically distinct from those found in Kenya and Ethiopia (e.g. Breuil et al. 1951; Merrick 1975). Furthermore, comparative analyses of Egyptian and Levantine MP assemblages suggest that no compel- ling technological connections existed between these two regions at this time (Marks 1990; Van Peer 1998). So, while there is a plethora of genetic evidence sup- porting the ‘Out of Africa’ model, archaeological data along one of the primary corridors of human migration have been absent until now. Station One, an MSA site from northern Sudan, represents the only example of a techno-typological connection be- tween the source area of anatomically modern hu- mans and Northeast Africa.
[...]
quote:Hawass et al. 2010 claim it is not pathological, a 2012 study i posted claims it is. Having reviewed the evidence, I would say it is. Tut's head looks deformed with pathologies.
Originally posted by tropicals redacted:
@cass
How do you reconcile this:
quote:And this:
Tut had a CI of 83.9 (Hawass et al. 2010). We also know this bachycephaly was not pathological.
quote:With this?:
If a skull is brachycephalic it is highly unlikely (unless it is pathological) to infer Sub-Saharan African ancestry.
quote:
the skull overall, including aspects of the face spoke fairly strongly of his African origins
quote:View the maps in Brace. He has a pre-1492 map.
Originally posted by Truthcentric:
quote:I don't think that Luschan-scale map necessarily shows what the optimal skin color for each latitude would be. It merely shows what the modal skin colors of people currently inhabiting a region are. Notice that the tropical Americas on your map don't have the same skin tone range as Africa, which reflects the Native American inhabitants' ultimate origin in northeastern Asia. Ergo, your map is not taking recent migrations and admixture into account.
Originally posted by Gor:
My claim is supported by the latitude (luscan-scale distribution) and ancient artwork.
This map on the other hand was devised by Nina Jablonksi as a prediction of what the optimal skin color for each latitude would be, absent all those migrations. The map does predict that indigenous Eastern Saharans might not be as dark as Sudanics living just north of the the Equator, but on the other hand the values for most of Egypt don't seem to be much lighter than those of the Congo Basin (where Pygmy people live) or southernmost Africa (home to Khoisan).
Source
(Pity I could not find a larger, higher-quality version of this particular map)
quote:Have fun with your luscan-scale theory, while ignoring the obvious. Distribution and movement.
Originally posted by Gor:
quote:View the maps in Brace. He has a pre-1492 map.
Originally posted by Truthcentric:
quote:I don't think that Luschan-scale map necessarily shows what the optimal skin color for each latitude would be. It merely shows what the modal skin colors of people currently inhabiting a region are. Notice that the tropical Americas on your map don't have the same skin tone range as Africa, which reflects the Native American inhabitants' ultimate origin in northeastern Asia. Ergo, your map is not taking recent migrations and admixture into account.
Originally posted by Gor:
My claim is supported by the latitude (luscan-scale distribution) and ancient artwork.
This map on the other hand was devised by Nina Jablonksi as a prediction of what the optimal skin color for each latitude would be, absent all those migrations. The map does predict that indigenous Eastern Saharans might not be as dark as Sudanics living just north of the the Equator, but on the other hand the values for most of Egypt don't seem to be much lighter than those of the Congo Basin (where Pygmy people live) or southernmost Africa (home to Khoisan).
Source
(Pity I could not find a larger, higher-quality version of this particular map)
Click
Old World distribution of human skin colour, c. 1492 AD. From Brace (1973).
Egypt is medium brown with light brown at the northern coast.
quote:"Having reviewed the evidence", how convenient. Please.
Hawass et al. 2010 claim it is not pathological, a 2012 study i posted claims it is. Having reviewed the evidence, I would say it is. Tut's head looks deformed with pathologies.
quote:Maybe you should speak to Lioness about the title of the OP.
It seems strange that you think there is a 'white' Tut reconstruction.
quote:Oh dear. Given the proximity of Egypt to tropical Africa, which of course is where the bulk of the population migrated from, your quote informs us of the impact of gene flow/migration from the Near East and southern Europe into Egypt. Thanks. Very useful.
"From known cases of population expansion, it can be seen that the processes of natural selection that cause skin pigmentation to vary work at very slow rates.
quote:Relevance of "this"?
That falls within the "coppery" (reddish-brown) range I was talking about, probably at the darker end of the spectrum though. But its still far lighter than this.
quote:You don't have a point. The geneticist in question was talking about skin colour within the context of Tut's sub-Saharan population affiliates.
My point is that you should have asked North vs. Sub-Saharan African, not European vs. African.
quote:What you've posted here and elsewhere is among the most virulent, dedicated racism I've ever seen on the net. Let's not forget your suggestion that the media were overly sympathetic to the murdered Black teenager Stephen Lawrence because in their photos of him, they didn't show what you call his black power fist. Let's not forget your sick connections with far-right groups. Let's not forget your Black Men with Energy thread. Nothing anyone else has posted here on ES comes close.
Relevance: you only think white people are racist or ethnocentric. DHDoxy and other posters on this forum have challenged you before on this: extreme racist material posted by black posters, you don't report or consider offensive. Yet you are known to go berserk if a white person merely posts a mild racial comment in comparison.
quote:Get's worse.
There are non-Africans with 'tropically adapted' limbs, I never made a big thing about it. The tropics is not confined to Africa. Zaharan however uses this "tropical African" nonsense, and you seem to have adopted it (look at name).
quote:Someone more qualified than a former BNP member with a BTEC in forensic anthropology.
There are very few measurements, which means precisely what I stated. All you have done is appeal to authority.
quote:Filthy lie.
And lol @ "sick racist internet activity". This is coming from you: a pervert who wrote on his 18th birthday he had ordered white female strippers
quote:You mean this article in The Independent?
creates filthy threads across the internet "why do white women pay for sex in Jamaica",
quote:Revisit the post and find where my family had a racial debate because there was a blonde Barbie doll.
and how you once arrived at a holiday-cottage in rural England to find a blonde Barbie doll which you had a family racial debate over because it wasn't black with an afro. Yes, you're really 'normal' on race dude.
quote:Deranged, mendacious racist.
If you meant Tut, probably yes. black person/African - no.
quote:This is no more useful for your purposes than that Luschan map you posted earlier. I'm not interested in (speculative) reconstructions of Old World skin tones circa 1492 AD, which is helluva later than the period we're all interested in anyway. Really, the 1492 date is only useful for factoring out historical European and African movements to the Americas. We are talking about the optimal skin tone for each latitude and environment, which wouldn't necessarily correspond to how the current inhabitants of a region might look.
Originally posted by Gor:
View the maps in Brace. He has a pre-1492 map.
Click
Old World distribution of human skin colour, c. 1492 AD. From Brace (1973).
Egypt is medium brown with light brown at the northern coast.
quote:Lol, no it isn't. I can only presume since you've recently become far more racialized in ideology or ethnocentric you want to distance yourself from those posts which might embarrass your position. While it is convenient for you the thread was deleted, your comments I remember.
Filthy lie.
Quote the post and put it in this thread. When you can't find it, you ask Tukuler to delete your crap and you apologise. If you don't by 9pm tomorrow evening (30th October), I'm taking things further.
quote:You are contradicting yourself here.
Originally posted by Gor:
Claus,
60% or more of comments you posted were deleted on your first account for breaking rules. The message I got from Sammy who reviewed your doxx threads (he removed) is that you are 'horrible'.
Why do you think you lost access to your account? Work it out.
Your "women who-travel for sex" thread appears to have also been deleted (so of course I cannot quote what you posted). In contrast, I have never had a thread deleted for rule-breaking. Your history on this forum is very toxic to say the least, not mine. I never resorted to doxxing, and when I spoke to Sammy he seemed to have no problem with me. He thanked me for flagging most your posts - which he agreed were illegal.
The threads I created on Truthcentric and Swenet I got deleted fairly quickly, and I apologized. However I did not doxx anything, or even use names. It was a couple of linked photos through facebook. In contrast you were doxxing, and doing other rule-breaking, but never even apologized.
So what exactly did you ever contribute on your first account? 20+ doxxing threads where you were posting my personal details, and a couple of troll threads about your sexual perversions. I really don't need a lecture from you about morality or having a "good internet history".
And the libel about me being a BNP member is mostly psychological projection on your behalf. Yes, I know who you are. You are member of a political party and have even contested council elections. I am not a member of a political party, and never have been.
quote:A few things here, as well.
Originally posted by Gor:
The BNP character assassination came from ES member "son of ra" aka big mike m of Zaharans "base", after I posted this:
http://www.topix.com/forum/afam/THD8TIJQR8JTJT51E
^ That's the real Zaharan/son of ra there, but these same individuals then come on this forum claiming to be totally neutral or objective regarding race.
quote:No, i wished no one to get banned. I maintain freedom of speech (within the law) and never started to post anyone's personal details, or break other forum rules. Claus is very different: he doxxes people and then starts blackmailing through PM, i.e. the sort of comments he sent me were that I had to give up my views, or my home address would be put all over the forum, or he would start meddling with my university. This is the most immoral activity I have ever encountered on a forum, which is why most his posts ended up deleted by the admin, and why I suspect his first account ended up blocked, yet here he is above trying to imply he has a 'good internet history'.
Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor:
quote:You are contradicting yourself here.
Originally posted by Gor:
Claus,
60% or more of comments you posted were deleted on your first account for breaking rules. The message I got from Sammy who reviewed your doxx threads (he removed) is that you are 'horrible'.
Why do you think you lost access to your account? Work it out.
Your "women who-travel for sex" thread appears to have also been deleted (so of course I cannot quote what you posted). In contrast, I have never had a thread deleted for rule-breaking. Your history on this forum is very toxic to say the least, not mine. I never resorted to doxxing, and when I spoke to Sammy he seemed to have no problem with me. He thanked me for flagging most your posts - which he agreed were illegal.
The threads I created on Truthcentric and Swenet I got deleted fairly quickly, and I apologized. However I did not doxx anything, or even use names. It was a couple of linked photos through facebook. In contrast you were doxxing, and doing other rule-breaking, but never even apologized.
So what exactly did you ever contribute on your first account? 20+ doxxing threads where you were posting my personal details, and a couple of troll threads about your sexual perversions. I really don't need a lecture from you about morality or having a "good internet history".
And the libel about me being a BNP member is mostly psychological projection on your behalf. Yes, I know who you are. You are member of a political party and have even contested council elections. I am not a member of a political party, and never have been.
1) you've stated that you've contacted Sam, to delete threads made by Clause. You also demanded for Sarahan to get banned.
2) some wanted you to get banned, or your threads deleted. While others, me included were like no, you have the right to express your feelings as well, even thou it's rubbish and rasict dated material.
3) the thread you've mentioned by Saharan, was a response to your thread on African American women. But in many occasions you've crossed the line. Just so you know.
quote:you have to look inside the magazine
Originally posted by Gor:
This to me is dark skinned:
The New Face of King Tut National Geographic
I guess what someone considers dark or light is to some degree relative to their own skin tone. I don't personally see this reconstruction as a 'White Tut', he's basically a bronze colour, but someone who has darker brown skin probably considers this to be light in comparison.
quote:Utter crap.
60% or more of comments you posted were deleted on your first account for breaking rules.
quote:So Sammy thought me 'horrible' because I was onto you, a committed racist? Glad we now have an idea of this guy Sammy's values.
The message I got from Sammy who reviewed your doxx threads (he removed) is that you are 'horrible'.
quote:So Sammy hacked my account?
Why do you think you lost access to your account? Work it out.
quote:Bullshitting liar.
Your "women who-travel for sex" thread appears to have also been deleted (so of course I cannot quote what you posted).
quote:Had there been proper moderation here under Ausar, you would have been banned from the outset.
In contrast, I have never had a thread deleted for rule-breaking.
quote:Is this some sort of a joke? You're delusional.
Your history on this forum is very toxic to say the least, not mine.
quote:But then -
I never resorted to doxxing, and when I spoke to Sammy he seemed to have no problem with me. He thanked me for flagging most your posts - which he agreed were illegal.
quote:He thanked you for that? So now we really do know what sort of man Sammy is - someone who aligns himself with racists. And illegal? Someone hacked my account and impersonated me - also the content you've posted here is hate speech. But that was OK, since Ausar refused to anything about it, and Sammy backed you, right?
The threads I created on Truthcentric and Swenet...
quote:You deleted them quickly because we found out who you were. You didn't 'doxx' or use names because you didn't have any pertinent information on Truthcentric or Swenet. Oh yeah, you only deleted that shitty OP on Charlie Bass, where you showed his wife and kid, because I asked you to in e-mail communication:
I got deleted fairly quickly, and I apologized. However I did not doxx anything, or even use names. It was a couple of linked photos through facebook. In contrast you were doxxing, and doing other rule-breaking, but never even apologized.
quote:Believe me when I say I am unrepentant. I.would.do.it.again.
In contrast you were doxxing, and doing other rule-breaking, but never even apologized.
So what exactly did you ever contribute on your first account? 20+ doxxing threads where you were posting my personal details,
quote:Provide quotes/links, please. Why do you keep coming up with this stuff about what you see as my sexual perversions?
and a couple of troll threads about your sexual perversions.
quote:Is that why after you were named, you scurried around the internet deleting your posts and changing your usernames?
I really don't need a lecture from you about morality or having a "good internet history".
quote:And
And the libel about me being a BNP member is mostly psychological projection on your behalf.
quote:Could you therefore clarify whether you've ever had any links or affiliation with the far-right British National Party, voluntary or otherwise?
I am not a member of a political party, and never have been.
quote:No sh1t Sherlock, we've been in e-mail correspondence.
Yes, I know who you are.
quote:Which political party? Which elections?
You are member of a political party and have even contested council elections.
quote:Yes, it is a lie and you're lying. Again, if anything's been deleted it's got jack to do with me.
Lol, no it isn't. I can only presume since you've recently become far more racialized in ideology or ethnocentric you want to distance yourself from those posts which might embarrass your position. While it is convenient for you the thread was deleted, your comments I remember.
quote:Freedom to push your hateful agenda.
No, i wished no one to get banned. I maintain freedom of speech (within the law) and never started to post anyone's personal details, or break other forum rules.
quote:I really don't care about whether you give up your views, I just don't want to see them here. So when you didn't desist from posting your racist crap then life becomes a bitch, eh?
Claus is very different: he doxxes people and then starts blackmailing through PM, i.e. the sort of comments he sent me were that I had to give up my views, or my home address would be put all over the forum, or he would start meddling with my university.
quote:Cry me a fvcking river.
This is the most immoral activity I have ever encountered on a forum,
quote:What sort of site owner gives sanctuary to a racist, and then not only blocks the account of someone trying to get them to stop their filth, but also impersonates them?
which is why most his posts ended up deleted by the admin, and why I suspect his first account ended up blocked,
quote:Again, collate a dossier. Oh, could you also put one together of your handiwork? I should have a hard copy somewhere if you need to borrow. I can post it to you.
yet here he is above trying to imply he has a 'good internet history'.
quote:I smirked when you saw 'innocent'! Look, saying "I'm not going to convert though to the "Negroid = Egypt" theory" betrays your underlying hate for black people. Whether this hatred has caused your psychological disorder, or is the result of it, I neither know nor care.
Look above, and you will also see he started all the usual character assassinations again, as well as bringing my credentials into the thread (why?) and repeatedly posting i'm "racist". I do not see anything racist I have posted in this thread. Claus just uses it to smear innocent people.
quote:Which far-left political party would that be? Better make it good.
For the record: Claus is a member of a far-left political party and has contested elections for them.
quote:Post whatever information you have on me.
I have all his personal details. I can easily use his political involvement and beliefs to make an argument against his neutrality on these subjects, but I have never (unlike him) resorted to this. I would also never (unlike him) doxx, or threaten/blackmail to post his details.
quote:Did you have links with the BNP in your teens?
He posts libel that I am a BNP member, and then tries to use that against me (when I never have been)
quote:Please.
by inferring I am biased/not objective or whatever (as if anyone cares over the internet).
quote:This is the same individual who keeps coming back under different usernames. Wait, didn't you pretend to be Amur from the Kabyle at one stage?
That lie is very bizarre considering I used to administrate Metapedia and several other Neo-Nazi wiki-projects or web-portals. If he did detective work he would also find I am the basis of Karl Earlson's articles. I never have tried to hide my former views, or links to extremist sites or literature.The BNP-smear though just shows Claus desperately went through my internet history to find something, anything, to attack me.
quote:Go back and read your slimy, loaded "I'm not going to convert though to the "Negroid = Egypt" theory" and irrelevant swipes at Keita, ES and ESR members.
If you look you will see I responded to his comments with data and sources, but all he could resort to is the usual "you are racist".
quote:Lioness started it actually.
So i'm not sure exactly how I could respond without derailing the thread (what he started).
quote:How many times have you rejoined now.
I only rejoined here to post about the cranial index.
quote:Good riddance, but where have I heard that before?
I certainly don't intent to hang around here.
quote:This forum isn't about 'what you want'. People are entitled to freedom of speech and their opinions. You however find it hard to accept people hold different viewpoints. No-one else on this forum claimed I posted "hate propaganda".
I really don't care about whether you give up your views, I just don't want to see them here. So when you didn't desist from posting your racist crap then life becomes a bitch, eh?
quote:right, so maybe you can address my last post
Originally posted by Gor:
Thread has already been derailed enough, and I'm not wasting any further time responding to you.
quote:lol.. never said I was "neutral" concerning race,
Originally posted by Gor:
The BNP character assassination came from ES member "son of ra" aka big mike m of Zaharans "base", after I posted this:
http://www.topix.com/forum/afam/THD8TIJQR8JTJT51E
^ That's the real Zaharan/son of ra there, but these same individuals then come on this forum claiming to be totally neutral or objective regarding race.
quote:Elisabeth Daynhs is not a forensic or paleolitropist. What she is, is a scam artist, who can make sculptures appear realistically.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:you have to look inside the magazine
Originally posted by Gor:
This to me is dark skinned:
The New Face of King Tut National Geographic
I guess what someone considers dark or light is to some degree relative to their own skin tone. I don't personally see this reconstruction as a 'White Tut', he's basically a bronze colour, but someone who has darker brown skin probably considers this to be light in comparison.
Forensic sculptor Elisabeth Daynhs
used tissue-depth information
to lay clay over plastic skull models.
She then added layers of "fleshlike" silicone
^^^ I ask you is this fair ?
.
BBC 2014
^^^ look at his thighs, out of the shadow, pale, wtf ?
obviously these reconstructionists are conspicuously lightening the skin tone to make
white people, incl themselves, feel more comfortable, admit it so we can move on
quote:Indeed you have your views, as does Clause. And indeed the political party either of you endorses has nothing to do with this forum. Since this is not a forum about politics (derictly).
Originally posted by Gor:
quote:No, i wished no one to get banned. I maintain freedom of speech (within the law) and never started to post anyone's personal details, or break other forum rules. Claus is very different: he doxxes people and then starts blackmailing through PM, i.e. the sort of comments he sent me were that I had to give up my views, or my home address would be put all over the forum, or he would start meddling with my university. This is the most immoral activity I have ever encountered on a forum, which is why most his posts ended up deleted by the admin, and why I suspect his first account ended up blocked, yet here he is above trying to imply he has a 'good internet history'.
Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor:
quote:You are contradicting yourself here.
Originally posted by Gor:
Claus,
60% or more of comments you posted were deleted on your first account for breaking rules. The message I got from Sammy who reviewed your doxx threads (he removed) is that you are 'horrible'.
Why do you think you lost access to your account? Work it out.
Your "women who-travel for sex" thread appears to have also been deleted (so of course I cannot quote what you posted). In contrast, I have never had a thread deleted for rule-breaking. Your history on this forum is very toxic to say the least, not mine. I never resorted to doxxing, and when I spoke to Sammy he seemed to have no problem with me. He thanked me for flagging most your posts - which he agreed were illegal.
The threads I created on Truthcentric and Swenet I got deleted fairly quickly, and I apologized. However I did not doxx anything, or even use names. It was a couple of linked photos through facebook. In contrast you were doxxing, and doing other rule-breaking, but never even apologized.
So what exactly did you ever contribute on your first account? 20+ doxxing threads where you were posting my personal details, and a couple of troll threads about your sexual perversions. I really don't need a lecture from you about morality or having a "good internet history".
And the libel about me being a BNP member is mostly psychological projection on your behalf. Yes, I know who you are. You are member of a political party and have even contested council elections. I am not a member of a political party, and never have been.
1) you've stated that you've contacted Sam, to delete threads made by Clause. You also demanded for Sarahan to get banned.
2) some wanted you to get banned, or your threads deleted. While others, me included were like no, you have the right to express your feelings as well, even thou it's rubbish and rasict dated material.
3) the thread you've mentioned by Saharan, was a response to your thread on African American women. But in many occasions you've crossed the line. Just so you know.
Look above, and you will also see he started all the usual character assassinations again, as well as bringing my credentials into the thread (why?) and repeatedly posting i'm "racist". I do not see anything racist I have posted in this thread. Claus just uses it to smear innocent people.
For the record: Claus is a member of a far-left political party and has contested elections for them. I have all his personal details. I can easily use his political involvement and beliefs to make an argument against his neutrality on these subjects, but I have never (unlike him) resorted to this. I would also never (unlike him) doxx, or threaten/blackmail to post his details.
He posts libel that I am a BNP member, and then tries to use that against me (when I never have been) by inferring I am biased/not objective or whatever (as if anyone cares over the internet). That lie is very bizarre considering I used to administrate Metapedia and several other Neo-Nazi wiki-projects or web-portals. If he did detective work he would also find I am the basis of Karl Earlson's articles. I never have tried to hide my former views, or links to extremist sites or literature. The BNP-smear though just shows Claus desperately went through my internet history to find something, anything, to attack me.
If you look you will see I responded to his comments with data and sources, but all he could resort to is the usual "you are racist". So i'm not sure exactly how I could respond without derailing the thread (what he started). I only rejoined here to post about the cranial index. Areas I know little to nothing about (e.g. genetics) I do not touch. Anyway if the current Mod wants to remove this, my other reply above, and Claus' offtopic comments - that is fine by me. I certainly don't intent to hang around here.
quote:^^^Ha hahahahah you are clueless..
Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist:
[QB]
E1b1b is not Negroid.
Read it an weep -
''Sub-Saharan Africans belong to subclades of E other than E1b1b, while most non-Africans who belong to haplogroup E belong to its E1b1b subclade."
- Fulvio Cruciani et al, Phylogeographic Analysis of Haplogroup E1b1b (E-M215) Y Chromosomes Reveals Multiple Migratory Events Within and Out Of Africa, Am. J. Hum. Genet, p. 74)
^^The only thing is that the "quote above is a complete fake
and was never utter by Cruciani, as can be verified by looking at
his article: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1181964/?tool=pubmed
The foul faker doctored the quote not knowing the article has been much
discussed at ES. Testifying even more to his incompetence, Cruciani actually
does show E3b or E1b1b occuring in numerous places within "sub-Saharan" Africa.
The three main subclades of haplogroup E3b (E-M78, E-M81, and E-M34) and
the paragroup E-M35* are not homogeneously distributed on the African continent:
E-M78 has been observed in both northern and eastern Africa, E-M81 is restricted t
o northern Africa, E-M34 is common only in eastern Africa, and E-M35* is shared by
eastern and southern Africans (Cruciani et al. 2002)"
--Cruciani
And there is no "page 74" in the Cruciani article.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE FAKER'S BOGUS CLAIM PART- 15 - QUOTE:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by cassiterides:
posted 14 January, 2012 11:41 AM
If you are a white heterosexual male in Britain you have virtually zero chance of getting a job.
All the jobs go to blacks or other immigrants.
^^LOL - DISTORTERic nonsense.
As of 2001, 92.1% of the UK population identified
themselves as White, leaving 7.9%[270] of the UK
population identifying themselves as mixed race
or of an ethnic minority. The population of the
United Kingdom in the 2001 census was 58,789,194,
UK Office for National Statistics- 2001.
That leaves approx 54 million white people.
About 33% of that population were adult men.
Let's take away 8% or so for minorities. So you are saying then
that 25% of the approx 54 million white people
in the UK are all unemployed? Damn you are dumb,
but you only expose the bankruptcy of your racism.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE FAKER EXPOSED- PART 13- HIS BOGUS CLAIM OF "NORDIC"
EGYPTIAN ROYALTY
[QUOTE]Originally posted by cassiterides:
posted 28 December, 2011 05:40 PM
Early dynastic & old kingdom royalty was Nordic (blonde and fair skinned)
quote:
Originally posted by cassiterides:
^ Eurafrican is Caucasoid.
quote:But then, in your own thread, by your own hand,
Originally posted by Anglo-Pyr/Cassiredes:
"Fair hair and light eyes colours are only found among Caucasoids, esp of
Europe."
quote:^^A bogus reference.
The source is Cavalli-Sforza's book on the Pygmies entitled 'African pygmies' (Academic Press, 1986).
This work shows that Negroids mutated from an ancestral pygmy population around 9,000 BC in West Africa. So the 'true' Black African today is a recent mutation. Caucasoids and Mongoloids predate them. [Wink] Negroids only migrated into other parts of Africa during the Bantu expansion or slightly earlier. Prior to them, Caucasoids inhabited North Africa and Bushmen (Capoids) to the south who were displaced by the Caucasoids from the Mediterranean around 12,000 BC.
quote:Cosinged strongly!
Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
quote:lol.. never said I was "neutral" concerning race,
Originally posted by Gor:
The BNP character assassination came from ES member "son of ra" aka big mike m of Zaharans "base", after I posted this:
http://www.topix.com/forum/afam/THD8TIJQR8JTJT51E
^ That's the real Zaharan/son of ra there, but these same individuals then come on this forum claiming to be totally neutral or objective regarding race.
for I question the notion of biological "race" altogether.
Ranges of diverse populations, yes- biological race,
where Africans are "sub-species" and such, no. How
could I claim to be "neutral"? And when did you become
a paragon of objectivity and neutrality? You are
among the most biased here. And I have turned around racist
arguments and used them against assorted racists,
who get quite upset when I do- they think its all one way,
and become the biggest crybabies when their own race
models and arguments are flipped around and applied in reverse.
And I am not "Big Mike." "Big Mike" is one of a number
of people, including myself, who use that solid base of data
to hit hard at all comers- assorted racists, "HBDers" and
sundry distorters on a variety of web forums & blogs. If
"Big Mike" is running his own "pride" threads, good
for him, but that's his baby, not mine.
quote:But then Lioness, we need to remember what you pointed out regarding his recent (his second) acknowledgment that the Egyptians were black Africans:
He seems like he's not as bad as he used to be, so why not let him continue on that path. See if he improves further or maybe reverts, see where it goes
But yall want to force him to go back to be Anglo, just for the sake of having a whipping boy and feel self righteous about it
that's boring though
quote:Again, let's not be naïve.
yall want to force him to go back to be Anglo, just for the sake of having a whipping boy and feel self righteous about it
that's boring though
quote:Because I'm on the iPad. And it's a pain to erase large paragraphs.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
Troll Patrol why do you quote a big block of text from a poster you think is stupid only to make a one sentence comment?
That's giving him a free repeat of a big paragraph of his remarks
- and we all read it before anyway. Why do we need to scroll past that?
quote:It doesn't matter if somebody has reformed or not. This is an open forum where black supermacists and white supremacists and everything in between can converse or debate. Nobody is required to have a viewpoint like other posters. That's boring anyway
Originally posted by tropicals redacted:
[QB] @Lioness
Yes, I too was willing to see if he'd reformed - but let's not be naïve about this:
quote:No, not at all. I don't watch these things, and I don't care who stars in them. My simple point was that if we remove all the white actors from Egypt-set films, shouldn't we also remove all the blacks from programmes/films like Merlin, and Thor? Otherwise there would be a double standard.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
So they got Ramses and Moses and Tuya as pale Europeans in Exodus, principal roles
Yet when there's a token black in a medieval flick he cries.
They have been whitenizing Egyptians in Hollywood for years.
And now the excuse for is they throw in a couple token side parts in medieval films ( and there were a few blacks around even)
Or Merlin which is not even historical
quote:Are you telling that there is a movie, wherein the roleplay of Merlin is done by a black actor? Can you link it?
Originally posted by Gor:
I created an ES-reloaded account to download Angel's paper on the Egyptians several months back. I hardly posted there and I don't see anything offensive I posted. Someone made a post claiming they were sick of seeing white actors playing roles in Egyptian-based films, I merely responded by pointing out blacks have been in stuff like Merlin for years, which is also out of place, and it was hypocritical of them to complain. This is supposedly again 'racism' or "hate propaganda" in Claus' view. Whatever.
I've already explained enough above, so there's no more point in wasting time with it. However I will say that Claus' is/was expecting for too much with his "reform" agenda, which are tied to his own cranky far-left views. The guy is by no means a moderate himself. I am not going to convert to a tree-loving hippy, sorry Claus.
This is his political party. Transgender loos.
quote:What you lack to understand is MOST diverse. Africans are most diverse in geno- and phenotype.
Originally posted by Gor:
Relethford's paper
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11126724
Human skin color diversity is highest in sub-Saharan African populations.
Note however abstract:
"For both measures, the average level of within-population diversity is higher in sub-Saharan Africa than in other geographic regions."
This is what Zaharan failed to take into account again (like Hierneux). None of these papers support his claim that Europeans lack the "full diversity":
"What scholar specifically supports your claim
as to the "full diversity" or Europeans and Asians
exceeding or the same as Africans? What's taking
you so long in producing the data?"
All populations have virtually the "full diversity", they just differ in their frequencies and sub-Saharan Africans cover most of the world's mean range/have the highest mean variation.
quote:My question to you is, from where do they inherit this trait, in upper or latter?
Originally posted by Gor:
There's a good quote in Brues (1977) somewhere, where she states that 1 in 100,000 Northern Europeans inherit dark/brown skin. So like I said you can find the "full diversity" pretty much anywhere. The traits just differ by frequency.
quote:I think you should reread Lioness's post, a few times. And let it marinate for a while.
Originally posted by Gor:
quote:No, not at all. I don't watch these things, and I don't care who stars in them. My simple point was that if we remove all the white actors from Egypt-set films, shouldn't we also remove all the blacks from programmes/films like Merlin, and Thor? Otherwise there would be a double standard.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
So they got Ramses and Moses and Tuya as pale Europeans in Exodus, principal roles
Yet when there's a token black in a medieval flick he cries.
They have been whitenizing Egyptians in Hollywood for years.
And now the excuse for is they throw in a couple token side parts in medieval films ( and there were a few blacks around even)
Or Merlin which is not even historical
quote:This is the skin tone, the should be using to depict dynastic Egyptians in reconstructions and film >>>
Originally posted by Gor:
quote:No, not at all. I don't watch these things, and I don't care who stars in them. My simple point was that if we remove all the white actors from Egypt-set films, shouldn't we also remove all the blacks from programmes/films like Merlin, and Thor? Otherwise there would be a double standard.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
So they got Ramses and Moses and Tuya as pale Europeans in Exodus, principal roles
Yet when there's a token black in a medieval flick he cries.
They have been whitenizing Egyptians in Hollywood for years.
And now the excuse for is they throw in a couple token side parts in medieval films ( and there were a few blacks around even)
Or Merlin which is not even historical
quote:To elaborate quickly on Merlin.
Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor:
quote:Are you telling that there is a movie, wherein the roleplay of Merlin is done by a black actor? Can you link it?
Originally posted by Gor:
I created an ES-reloaded account to download Angel's paper on the Egyptians several months back. I hardly posted there and I don't see anything offensive I posted. Someone made a post claiming they were sick of seeing white actors playing roles in Egyptian-based films, I merely responded by pointing out blacks have been in stuff like Merlin for years, which is also out of place, and it was hypocritical of them to complain. This is supposedly again 'racism' or "hate propaganda" in Claus' view. Whatever.
I've already explained enough above, so there's no more point in wasting time with it. However I will say that Claus' is/was expecting for too much with his "reform" agenda, which are tied to his own cranky far-left views. The guy is by no means a moderate himself. I am not going to convert to a tree-loving hippy, sorry Claus.
This is his political party. Transgender loos.
quote:http://www.bestapples.com/varieties/
Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
Gor says:
All populations have virtually the "full diversity", they just differ in their frequencies and sub-Saharan Africans cover most of the world's mean range/have the highest mean variation.
Witless one. If your own "mean frequencies" which you
mention show greater African diversity than non-Africans,
why then do you, in a most asinine display of logic,
still keep insisting that the very same "supporting data"
you yourself brought up, is wrong, and that Africans
do not have that greater diversity? Don't you get
it dummy- how you are contradicting yourself? Let's
look at your statement:
"All populations have virtually the "full diversity", they just differ in their frequencies"
Dullard. If they "just differ in their frequencies" doesn't
that tell you all are NOT the same? Why do the "differences"
show Africans have the highest diversity? Call it "mean"
or whatever- it doesn't make the slightest bit of
difference. I mean, can't you "HBD" geniuses come up
with better talking points to repeat, rather than
your dismal display of logic? Oh wait- Big Mike and
I have shown numerous times online that "logic" is
a foreign concept to people like you.
Originally posted by Gor:
There's a good quote in Brues (1977) somewhere, where she states that 1 in 100,000 Northern Europeans inherit dark/brown skin. So like I said you can find the "full diversity" pretty much anywhere. The traits just differ by frequency.
^You are now trying to shift the ground and wriggle
away by saying that well Europeans are all not alike.
But that was never at issue. Everyone knows they
don;t all look alike. Your diversionary shift still won't work.
In a stunning display of "logic" you say that Euros
and others differ in trait frequencies. But almost
in the next breath you insist that Euro variation
is on the same level of Africans- a clearly bogus
assertion.
Diversions won;t work. Old chup, carry on if you will,
exposing your ignorance, but do explain why you
still keep trying to duck and avoid the question
above- what scholars specifically support your contention that
Eurasians have higher diversity than Africans? Whether
it be "mean" variation or otherwise. What's taking
you so long in producing a credible scholar that
actually supports your bogus claim?
quote:I believe it is just whatever larger population size you sample and since most, if not all studies, choose Africa as the largest continent you get those results. None of this supports a recent African origin (RAO) of "modern humans":
Originally posted by Ponsford:
Genetic diversity refers to :Single nucleotide polymorphism;Copy number variants;Short tandem repeats;private haplotypes;alu insertions;micro-satellites.
Africans have more genetic diversity than the rest of humanity combine and the least Linkage disequilibrium in their genome.
quote:I understand what they are what I dont understand is how they tell a different story than arms length which you can discern from looking at wingspans, standing reach and height.
Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
^^It is obvious that you do not have a clue what
limb proportion ratios are about despite several
explanations above by Patrol, me and others. They
do not have to do with "wingspan." And they are
not height to "wingspan" ratios. You are clueless.
quote:Lol like hell it doesn't. Wingspan in relation to height absolutely positively can discern what populations are more tropically adapted however there is diversity and overlap so you cant look at one individual and tell anything. My question was how are joint ratios more accurate. I suspect that they have a similar range of diversity.
"Wingspan" is not a credible ratio measurement of tropical adaptation.
They way appear in dubious white "biodiversity" gobbledegook
and propaganda, but appear in no credible study as
as credible measurements of the adaptations in question.
NBA draft measurements are miles away from the topic.
Can you post any study where your so-called "wingspan"
model is used to measure limb proportions? From whence
quote:This is the fallacy of authority. The reason why we don't use wingspan or better yet standing reach and height is because we are much less likely to work with full skeletons in anthropology than we are in NBA combines. Which bring me back to my question above.
this mysterious "metrical data"? Where do you see
your "wingspan" referenced below? Is there a "wingspan"
indice that indicates tropical adaptation? Where
and who? Trinkhaus? Holliday? Keita? Raxter? Who are
these scientists using your mysterious measure of
wondrous "wingspans"?
quote:The study states that limb length is more variable. We can determine limb length with standing reach and height which is a little better than wingspan because it doesn't factor shoulder width. Despite being more adaptive which makes them more variable there is clear overlap. White people are not Neanderthals. They are barely or newly cold adapted in comparison. Funny to think about those brown skin Neanderthals. I'm starting to warm up to the albino theory.
Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
[QB] Fourtytribes says
Based on this study limb length is more adaptive than brachial and crural indicies. I would have thought they were the same thing. This suggest that those NBAdraft measurements are more relevant not less. It validates my point.
Actually the study says nothing about "wingspan" or any
height to wingspan ratio. Far from "validating" what you
are saying, it actually debunks your claims.
quote:This is not true. Most studies in Africa are of relatively recent times.
Originally posted by Gor:
quote:I believe it is just whatever larger population size you sample and since most, if not all studies, choose Africa as the largest continent you get those results. None of this supports a recent African origin (RAO) of "modern humans":
Originally posted by Ponsford:
Genetic diversity refers to :Single nucleotide polymorphism;Copy number variants;Short tandem repeats;private haplotypes;alu insertions;micro-satellites.
Africans have more genetic diversity than the rest of humanity combine and the least Linkage disequilibrium in their genome.
Relethford, J. H., & Harpending, H. C. (1995). Ancient differences in population size can mimic a recent African origin of modern humans. Current Anthropology, 667-674.
See how population size mimics RAO.
quote:http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/News/7673/47/The-truth-about-Tutankhamun.aspx
Tutankamun: the Truth Revealed” is the title of a TV show produced by a private company in England for the BBC and the Smithsonian Channel in the United States. But the show reveals lies, not the truth.
It quotes scientists whose real intention is to become famous in the media, and one of them, a former member of the Egyptian mummy project, uses the Egyptian team’s CT and DNA analysis without permission to spread lies about Tutankhamun, claiming that the ancient Egyptian boy king was handicapped, born with a club foot.
This golden boy has entered the hearts of people all over the world, and this person wanted to take him out of our hearts. This person and the film producer have made a huge mistake and in so doing they have lost the respect of all reasonable people. Scholars all over the world disagree with them, and, again, instead of revealing the truth all they have done is to propagate lies.
The UK’s Daily Mail newspaper has published an article on the new documentary on Tutankhamun, produced by STV and already aired. The documentary distorts what Tutankhamun looked like: the boy king, whose treasure and tomb still fascinate people across the world, was presented in a completely fantastic way, humiliating not only the Egyptian king but also rewriting the history of the ancient world.
The face of the king was reconstructed by a French team that rebuilds the features of the dead using special computer programmes. This reconstruction was not based on science or on the study of the anatomy of the face of the mummy, however. Another Egyptian-American team had already reconstructed the king’s face, but for some reason the programme used the image produced by the French.
It is obvious that there is a clear difference between the features of Tutankhamun’s mummy, preserved in his tomb in the Valley of the Kings, and the image shown in the programme. In my own lectures on the golden king, I always show three reconstructed images of Tutankhamun, and when I show the French reconstruction I am careful to say that it is not borne out by the facts.
Furthermore, the documentary makers stated that Tutankhamun had feminine hips, but this is not based on scientific evidence. First, the study of Tutankhamun’s mummy by X-ray and CT scan has not shown any indication of such female features. The hips of the mummy are tied up with linen, and it is not possible to show that he had the kind of female hips seen, for example, in statues of the pharaoh Akhenaten.
How did the television team, which did not perform any scientific studies or even touch the mummy, reach these results? The purpose was to tarnish the image of the Egyptian pharaoh.
Second, the idea behind focusing attention on Tutankhamun’s hips was to attract attention to the statues of Akhenaten, the father of Tutankhamun. These statues are expressions of the god Aten, whom Akhenaten worshiped as a sole god and creator of the universe. Thus, the statues and images of Akhenaten with female features are reflections of religion. In fact, the skeleton of Akhenaten, which was buried in tomb KV55, has no feminine features.
Scientific studies carried out by the Egyptian team on the mummy of Tutankhamun have shown that the king was generally in good health in spite of suffering from flat feet, meaning that blood did not reach his left toes. The archaeological evidence proves that the king grew up and lived in Memphis, the administrative capital of Egypt during the 18th Dynasty of the New Kingdom.
He lived in a palace at Memphis and his wet-nurse Maya took care of him: the French archaeologist Alan Zivie has found her tomb, which contains an image of Tutankhamun sitting on her lap.
Tutankhamun also built a small rest house to the south of the temple of Khafre at Giza. The desert between Giza and Saqqara was called the Valley of Ghazal (the valley of deer) and Tutankhamun used this rest house to relax after hunting wild animals. This fact alone shows that he was not the invalid claimed in the television programme.
In addition, the king appears in many scenes depicted on golden shrines and wooden boxes, as well as on fan holders, sitting or standing in his chariot. This also shows that he was fond of shooting and hunting.
One of the new discoveries found beneath the houses of a village located between Abusir and Saqqara is a block that depicts Tutankhamun seated and shooting wild animals, while his wife, Ankhesenamun, is kneeling by his feet. If he had looked like the image broadcast in the TV documentary he would never have been able to hunt wild animals.
This documentary did not entertain at all, and, despite its efforts, it will not make me forget the beauty of Tutankhamun. But this is not the first time that a foreign team has damaged the golden boy.
The first occasion was in 1925, when Tutankhamun’s British discoverers, Howard Carter and Douglas Derry, opened the sarcophagus and coffins and found that the face of the mummy was covered with a golden mask and 150 amulets. Carter looked at the mask and saw the face as an idealised portrait of the young king executed in precious materials with unsurpassed craftsmanship.
I myself go to see the mask every time I visit the Cairo Museum. It served as a place in which Tutankhamun’s soul could dwell if some ill fate befell his body and thus was an essential item of the royal burial objects.
When the tomb was opened, the king’s head was adhered to the inside of this marvellous object because of the resins used to preserve the mummy. To remedy this situation, Carter and Derry heated knives to melt and cut through the resins. As a result, the process of freeing the mask removed the mummy’s head as well.
I can well imagine being in Carter’s place, seeing this exquisite face for the first time and knowing that within it was the real face of the king. Should I remove the mask and do damage to the royal mummy?
Or should I leave the two joined together and exhibit the mummy with the mask in place? My choice would have been the same as Carter’s: take the mask off, even at the price of damaging the head beneath.
The ancient Egyptians thought that the flesh of the gods was made of gold, so, fittingly, their artisans used this metal to create this masterpiece. They hammered together two thick gold sheets and then gave them the features of the king. Recent X-ray examination of the mask has revealed that the artisans added thin layers of gold, silver, and copper alloy to the gold body of the mask to increase its brilliance.
After the mask was taken off the mummy was broken into 18 pieces, but the head was in good condition. Harry Burton, a member of Carter’s expedition, took a photograph at the time that shows that Carter and his team left the head of the mummy covered with linen, turquoise beads and a diadem.
This seems to show that although Carter damaged the body of the king when he removed the bandages and the objects wrapped with them, he did not damage the head. What happened to the head to make it appear as it does today? The only possible explanation is that later investigators were responsible when they used chemicals to treat this part of the body.
The story began in 1968 when R G Harrison, an anatomist at the University of Liverpool in the UK, intended to X-ray the body. A sweet smell greeted him when he removed the lid of the coffin. The dismemberment was discovered, along with Carter’s poor job of rewrapping the mummy.
Harrison’s team also realised that Tutankhamun was missing one of his thumbs, as well as his penis. Harrison confirmed some of Derry’s observations, including the king’s age at death, though he believed it was at the younger end of the range of 18 to 22 years. He confirmed the similarities between the skulls of Tutankhamun and the KV 55 tomb mummy. These mummies were about the same height and similarly proportioned. Clearly, there was a family resemblance....
quote:^Indeed. But whatever the merits of multi-regionalism
Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor[/qb]This is not true. Most studies in Africa are of relatively recent times.
The first to do keen genome mapping in Afrcia was Sarah Tishkoff and her team.
The actual question here is. Do you actually understand any of what Ponsford mentioned?
Even after reading your citation, and the remaining part of the page I see you fail to acknowledge.
The Origins of Modern Humans: Biology Reconsidered
-- Fred H. Smith,James C. Ahern
(Page 377-387)
(Human populations have inherited many African genes, yet we claim that modernity did not...)
http://tinyurl.com/loayy8p [/QB]
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
quote:Has anyone ever denied most gene flow was from Africa? This mostly seems to be your straw man. You've also cut off the important part from Relethford (via your own bias):
Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
quote:^Indeed. But whatever the merits of multi-regionalism
Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish GeborThis is not true. Most studies in Africa are of relatively recent times.
The first to do keen genome mapping in Afrcia was Sarah Tishkoff and her team.
The actual question here is. Do you actually understand any of what Ponsford mentioned?
Even after reading your citation, and the remaining part of the page I see you fail to acknowledge.
The Origins of Modern Humans: Biology Reconsidered
-- Fred H. Smith,James C. Ahern
(Page 377-387)
(Human populations have inherited many African genes, yet we claim that modernity did not...)
http://tinyurl.com/loayy8p [/QB]
there is no question of the flow out of Africa, which
Relethford freely acknowledges under BOTH approaches.
Whether multi-regional or rao- whether smaller or
larger population size- or whether a single African
population made the OOA running, or several diverse African
groups- doesn't make a dime's worth
of difference.
"Several analyses have shown
that more recent modern
samples are morphologically more
similar to earlier samples from Africa
and the Middle East than to earlier
samples within their geographic re-
gion. For example, it has been sug-
gested that recent modern samples
from Europe (e.g., Cro-Magnon) are
more similar to older samples from
Africa and the Skhul-Qafzeh samples
in the Middle East than to earlier
Europeans (Neandertals).
These findings are often taken as support for
a recent African origin because this is
the type of pattern we would expect to
see if all recent modern humans came
from Africa within the last 100,000
years."
"Given a larger long-term population
size in Africa, both recent African ori-
gin and multiregional models predict
that temporally recent fossil samples
across the Old World will more closely
resemble earlier populations in Africa."
--Relethford. 1999. Models, Predictions, and the Fossil Record
of Modern Human Origins. Evo Anthro [/QB]
quote:
Based on these findings and the hypothesis of a larger long-term African population, I suggest that the multiregional model predicts
that biological distances based on many traits will show that recent modern fossil samples are more similar to earlier samples from Africa than
they are to samples from the same geographic region. I also suggest that regional continuity will be found in a small number of traits, but not all traits.
quote:Except the reverse is true. Neanderthal faces were not cold adapted, but 'white people' today clearly are, e.g. any European population has a very high frequency of narrow noses, while Neanderthal noses were virtually all broad.
Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes:
White people are not Neanderthals. They are barely or newly cold adapted in comparison. Funny to think about those brown skin Neanderthals. I'm starting to warm up to the albino theory. [/QB]
quote:Interesting. If I may ask, what things were you researching?
Originally posted by Djehuti:
Oh great. Now that I'm back I see Euronuts invading the forum.
Not only did I have work, my social life, and the elections, but I was also doing some research and have plans to post findings in this forum.
However, I really don't want my threads being polluted with the racial nonsense.
quote:I find the location questionable with the way tropical Africa produces narrow features and non-prognathic faces but it does explain why Neanderthals were far more cold adapted from the neck down and under the skin.
Originally posted by Gor:
quote:Except the reverse is true. Neanderthal faces were not cold adapted, but 'white people' today clearly are, e.g. any European population has a very high frequency of narrow noses, while Neanderthal noses were virtually all broad.
Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes:
White people are not Neanderthals. They are barely or newly cold adapted in comparison. Funny to think about those brown skin Neanderthals. I'm starting to warm up to the albino theory.
The Neanderthal face is not cold adapted
J Hum Evol. 2011 Feb;60(2):234-9
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21183202
"Neanderthals possess a prognathic face and wide nose, both of which are the opposite of the condition most often seen in arctic mammals, including humans (Wolpoff, 1968; Prestrud, 1991)."
And this is explained by the nasal aperture in Neanderthals being constrained by wide intercanine
distances, so nasal narrowing could not occur until dental reduction which happened only in the last 100,000-50,000 years in Europe (see any of Brace's studies on tooth size). [/QB]
quote:This is a very good question for everybody in this forum. A question which may be more appropriate in its own thread.
Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
What's your take on Toby Wilkinson's book The Rise
And Fall of Ancient Egypt which posits Egypt's kingship
system in part, as sort of an early "totalitarian" model?
quote:I added the text in [] myself.
The only real false note is Wilkinson's cynical view of pharaonic statecraft is bracing. However, it stems from a [post modern political cynicism] perspective, which he manages to drag into every chapter in ways that are sometimes gratingly anachronistic and a-historical.
quote:The book is well written and entertaining but I was also questioning Wilkinson's post-modern political cynicism point of view in relation to Ancient Egypt. As the first quote above say it, I think it was anachronistic and a-historical.
I own several other books by this distinguished, veteran Egyptologist; all of them quite wonderful. This volume seems to have been written with the intention of integrating old and new data about the subject in a more relevant and convenient manner. But, perhaps the desire to entertain won out. I was shocked to find a frequently dim, even cynical view of the Egyptians' sincerity, integrity, and religious sensitivity.
quote:I very much disagree with that premise. I will explain the reasons why in a thread I plan on creating about divine kingship in Africa in general and Egypt specifically. There seems to be much misunderstanding of this concept and institution as it was practiced. I will say that while the king's power was in theory supreme, in practice it was well regulated by a sacred mandate i.e. maat. Also, while the centralized/federal government was under the authority of the king, the various sepati (provinces) and cities and villages within still had autonomy of their own.
Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
What's your take on Toby Wilkinson's book The Rise
And Fall of Ancient Egypt which posits Egypt's kingship
system in part, as sort of an early "totalitarian" model?
quote:I'm looking forward to that thread. It would be refreshing to see a portrayal of ancient Egyptian and other African kingship that is more respectful than how they're usually portrayed.
Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:I very much disagree with that premise. I will explain the reasons why in a thread I plan on creating about divine kingship in Africa in general and Egypt specifically. There seems to be much misunderstanding of this concept and institution as it was practiced. I will say that while the king's power was in theory supreme, in practice it was well regulated by a sacred mandate i.e. maat. Also, while the centralized/federal government was under the authority of the king, the various sepati (provinces) and cities and villages within still had autonomy of their own.
Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
What's your take on Toby Wilkinson's book The Rise
And Fall of Ancient Egypt which posits Egypt's kingship
system in part, as sort of an early "totalitarian" model?
quote:White Nubian, Facts, White Nord, Sython Flter, are not me, and I've never posted as these names across the web. So congratulations for just making up four names that aren't mine and then bizarrely posting I own or post as them.
Apart from Atlantid, we know he has posted across the web under the names Anglo_Pyramidologist, Faheemdunkers, Pyramidologist, White Nubian, Facts, White Nord, Sython Flter and Thule, and Cassiterides.
quote:He's changed his philosophy
Originally posted by Son of Ra:
I still see that stupid and retarded white supremacist Gor/Faheembunker is still trying to...
quote:.
Originally posted by Gor:
There never was "divergence" between any human population: this would require branching through isolation.
quote:Can you find a single Pleistocene fossil from Africa with these features?
Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes:
I find the location questionable with the way tropical Africa produces narrow features and non-prognathic faces
quote:Yes, I have for over a year. Hence I shifted from Metapedia's "race realism" to Rationalwiki's "race realism". I have then countered what was being posted at Metapedia, even correcting what I was formerly posting.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:He's changed his philosophy
Originally posted by Son of Ra:
I still see that stupid and retarded white supremacist Gor/Faheembunker is still trying to...
this is the the new Cass:
quote:
Originally posted by Gor:
There never was "divergence" between any human population: this would require branching through isolation.
quote:If there there never was divergence between any human population
Originally posted by Gor:
quote:Can you find a single Pleistocene fossil from Africa with these features?
Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes:
I find the location questionable with the way tropical Africa produces narrow features and non-prognathic faces
quote:I read about 3/4 of the book and it has a lot of
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
quote:This is a very good question for everybody in this forum. A question which may be more appropriate in its own thread.
Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
What's your take on Toby Wilkinson's book The Rise
And Fall of Ancient Egypt which posits Egypt's kingship
system in part, as sort of an early "totalitarian" model?
A 2 minutes google search on cynicism and The Rise and Fall of Ancient Egypt provided me with those results:
quote:I added the text in [] myself.
The only real false note is Wilkinson's cynical view of pharaonic statecraft is bracing. However, it stems from a [post modern political cynicism] perspective, which he manages to drag into every chapter in ways that are sometimes gratingly anachronistic and a-historical.
quote:The book is well written and entertaining but I was also questioning Wilkinson's post-modern political cynicism point of view in relation to Ancient Egypt. As the first quote above say it, I think it was anachronistic and a-historical.
I own several other books by this distinguished, veteran Egyptologist; all of them quite wonderful. This volume seems to have been written with the intention of integrating old and new data about the subject in a more relevant and convenient manner. But, perhaps the desire to entertain won out. I was shocked to find a frequently dim, even cynical view of the Egyptians' sincerity, integrity, and religious sensitivity.
It seems Wilkinson let his own cynical outlook on anything politic cloud his judgment and analysis of the Ancient Egyptian Kingdom and state. Instead of studying it from their perspective, he studied it from his own modern perspective and cynical outlook on politics. All along my reading I found this perspective anachronistic and a-historical.
I'm curious to know other people's takes on it including yours Zarahan.
quote:^^Cool. If you can, post a link here as well to that
Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:I very much disagree with that premise. I will explain the reasons why in a thread I plan on creating about divine kingship in Africa in general and Egypt specifically. There seems to be much misunderstanding of this concept and institution as it was practiced. I will say that while the king's power was in theory supreme, in practice it was well regulated by a sacred mandate i.e. maat. Also, while the centralized/federal government was under the authority of the king, the various sepati (provinces) and cities and villages within still had autonomy of their own.
Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
What's your take on Toby Wilkinson's book The Rise
And Fall of Ancient Egypt which posits Egypt's kingship
system in part, as sort of an early "totalitarian" model?
quote:No biologist denies a geographical structure to a small number of genetic or phenotypic traits, or rather their frequencies. It is estimated of the 0.1% genetic variation found between human individuals: 90-95% is inter-individual, and 10-5% is found between populations. But virtually all the later match either clines or continuous gradients across space (isolation by distance) and not discontinuous "races" or "clusters". However if you polarize data you can produce the latter. This is often how "race" still creeps into many population genetic studies, which is what I criticized in the other thread.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:If there there never was divergence between any human population
Originally posted by Gor:
quote:Can you find a single Pleistocene fossil from Africa with these features?
Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes:
I find the location questionable with the way tropical Africa produces narrow features and non-prognathic faces
because this would require branching through isolation
and there is was no isolation
and not single Pleistocene fossil from Africa produces narrow features and non-prognathic faces
Then what accounts for that?
Why do people look different?
quote:No population from Africa has a mean tooth-size index that is microdont (small):
Originally posted by DD'eDeN:
Tropical humid forest/foraging: broad nose, large cutting teeth
Temperate arid grain-plains/farming: narrow nose, large grinding teeth
Temperate arid grain-plains/milling: small teeth
quote:Thats not me... I never registered to that site and I never tried to character assassinate you. You out of nowhere started character assassinating me once I joined Historum. Don't try to lie, because I can quote the exact post where you begun to do it.
Originally posted by Gor:
Agh.
I did not 'character assassinate' anyone, that is what you did, alongside Tropicals Redacted. The slander and baseless accusations from last year were then used by an actual white supremacist against me at Anthroscape:
quote:White Nubian, Facts, White Nord, Sython Flter, are not me, and I've never posted as these names across the web. So congratulations for just making up four names that aren't mine and then bizarrely posting I own or post as them.
Apart from Atlantid, we know he has posted across the web under the names Anglo_Pyramidologist, Faheemdunkers, Pyramidologist, White Nubian, Facts, White Nord, Sython Flter and Thule, and Cassiterides.
quote:All your posts in that thread were deleted. The thread has gone entirely. It doesn't even show on the forum (it was binned by an Admin). However one of your posts, or rather a segment of it, was copied to Anthroscape by "Mikemikev" before the thread was removed.
Originally posted by Son of Ra:
Thats not me... I never registered to that site and I never tried to character assassinate you. You out of nowhere started character assassinating me once I joined Historum. Don't try to lie, because I can quote the exact post where you begun to do it. [/QB]
quote:I cant be bothered to waste anymore time with it; you can bring the thread back on track, or just let this be buried. And yes I apologized for any insensitive race stuff or views I formerly held.
Originally posted by Son of Ra:
I don't know who that "Mikemikev" guy is. I've have been off the internet for a while due to family. The only sites I frequented when online were this, Topix, ES Facebook group and a hip hop/sports forum. Other than that I have no use or objective in trying to smear your name.
If anything I THOUGHT you changed when you made that apology and I actually applauded it. I don't know who used that quote against you. And why would I claim your Charlie Bass when I consider him to be a good poster?
quote:Never saw this article. Thanks for sharing.
Originally posted by Doug M:
Oh the irony, you even got Zahi Hawass complaining about this latest reconstruction.
Talk about a change of face.... pun intended:
quote:http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/News/7673/47/The-truth-about-Tutankhamun.aspx
Tutankamun: the Truth Revealed” is the title of a TV show produced by a private company in England for the BBC and the Smithsonian Channel in the United States. But the show reveals lies, not the truth.
It quotes scientists whose real intention is to become famous in the media, and one of them, a former member of the Egyptian mummy project, uses the Egyptian team’s CT and DNA analysis without permission to spread lies about Tutankhamun, claiming that the ancient Egyptian boy king was handicapped, born with a club foot.
This golden boy has entered the hearts of people all over the world, and this person wanted to take him out of our hearts. This person and the film producer have made a huge mistake and in so doing they have lost the respect of all reasonable people. Scholars all over the world disagree with them, and, again, instead of revealing the truth all they have done is to propagate lies.
The UK’s Daily Mail newspaper has published an article on the new documentary on Tutankhamun, produced by STV and already aired. The documentary distorts what Tutankhamun looked like: the boy king, whose treasure and tomb still fascinate people across the world, was presented in a completely fantastic way, humiliating not only the Egyptian king but also rewriting the history of the ancient world.
The face of the king was reconstructed by a French team that rebuilds the features of the dead using special computer programmes. This reconstruction was not based on science or on the study of the anatomy of the face of the mummy, however. Another Egyptian-American team had already reconstructed the king’s face, but for some reason the programme used the image produced by the French.
It is obvious that there is a clear difference between the features of Tutankhamun’s mummy, preserved in his tomb in the Valley of the Kings, and the image shown in the programme. In my own lectures on the golden king, I always show three reconstructed images of Tutankhamun, and when I show the French reconstruction I am careful to say that it is not borne out by the facts.
Furthermore, the documentary makers stated that Tutankhamun had feminine hips, but this is not based on scientific evidence. First, the study of Tutankhamun’s mummy by X-ray and CT scan has not shown any indication of such female features. The hips of the mummy are tied up with linen, and it is not possible to show that he had the kind of female hips seen, for example, in statues of the pharaoh Akhenaten.
How did the television team, which did not perform any scientific studies or even touch the mummy, reach these results? The purpose was to tarnish the image of the Egyptian pharaoh.
Second, the idea behind focusing attention on Tutankhamun’s hips was to attract attention to the statues of Akhenaten, the father of Tutankhamun. These statues are expressions of the god Aten, whom Akhenaten worshiped as a sole god and creator of the universe. Thus, the statues and images of Akhenaten with female features are reflections of religion. In fact, the skeleton of Akhenaten, which was buried in tomb KV55, has no feminine features.
Scientific studies carried out by the Egyptian team on the mummy of Tutankhamun have shown that the king was generally in good health in spite of suffering from flat feet, meaning that blood did not reach his left toes. The archaeological evidence proves that the king grew up and lived in Memphis, the administrative capital of Egypt during the 18th Dynasty of the New Kingdom.
He lived in a palace at Memphis and his wet-nurse Maya took care of him: the French archaeologist Alan Zivie has found her tomb, which contains an image of Tutankhamun sitting on her lap.
Tutankhamun also built a small rest house to the south of the temple of Khafre at Giza. The desert between Giza and Saqqara was called the Valley of Ghazal (the valley of deer) and Tutankhamun used this rest house to relax after hunting wild animals. This fact alone shows that he was not the invalid claimed in the television programme.
In addition, the king appears in many scenes depicted on golden shrines and wooden boxes, as well as on fan holders, sitting or standing in his chariot. This also shows that he was fond of shooting and hunting.
One of the new discoveries found beneath the houses of a village located between Abusir and Saqqara is a block that depicts Tutankhamun seated and shooting wild animals, while his wife, Ankhesenamun, is kneeling by his feet. If he had looked like the image broadcast in the TV documentary he would never have been able to hunt wild animals.
This documentary did not entertain at all, and, despite its efforts, it will not make me forget the beauty of Tutankhamun. But this is not the first time that a foreign team has damaged the golden boy.
The first occasion was in 1925, when Tutankhamun’s British discoverers, Howard Carter and Douglas Derry, opened the sarcophagus and coffins and found that the face of the mummy was covered with a golden mask and 150 amulets. Carter looked at the mask and saw the face as an idealised portrait of the young king executed in precious materials with unsurpassed craftsmanship.
I myself go to see the mask every time I visit the Cairo Museum. It served as a place in which Tutankhamun’s soul could dwell if some ill fate befell his body and thus was an essential item of the royal burial objects.
When the tomb was opened, the king’s head was adhered to the inside of this marvellous object because of the resins used to preserve the mummy. To remedy this situation, Carter and Derry heated knives to melt and cut through the resins. As a result, the process of freeing the mask removed the mummy’s head as well.
I can well imagine being in Carter’s place, seeing this exquisite face for the first time and knowing that within it was the real face of the king. Should I remove the mask and do damage to the royal mummy?
Or should I leave the two joined together and exhibit the mummy with the mask in place? My choice would have been the same as Carter’s: take the mask off, even at the price of damaging the head beneath.
The ancient Egyptians thought that the flesh of the gods was made of gold, so, fittingly, their artisans used this metal to create this masterpiece. They hammered together two thick gold sheets and then gave them the features of the king. Recent X-ray examination of the mask has revealed that the artisans added thin layers of gold, silver, and copper alloy to the gold body of the mask to increase its brilliance.
After the mask was taken off the mummy was broken into 18 pieces, but the head was in good condition. Harry Burton, a member of Carter’s expedition, took a photograph at the time that shows that Carter and his team left the head of the mummy covered with linen, turquoise beads and a diadem.
This seems to show that although Carter damaged the body of the king when he removed the bandages and the objects wrapped with them, he did not damage the head. What happened to the head to make it appear as it does today? The only possible explanation is that later investigators were responsible when they used chemicals to treat this part of the body.
The story began in 1968 when R G Harrison, an anatomist at the University of Liverpool in the UK, intended to X-ray the body. A sweet smell greeted him when he removed the lid of the coffin. The dismemberment was discovered, along with Carter’s poor job of rewrapping the mummy.
Harrison’s team also realised that Tutankhamun was missing one of his thumbs, as well as his penis. Harrison confirmed some of Derry’s observations, including the king’s age at death, though he believed it was at the younger end of the range of 18 to 22 years. He confirmed the similarities between the skulls of Tutankhamun and the KV 55 tomb mummy. These mummies were about the same height and similarly proportioned. Clearly, there was a family resemblance....
But I guess he must be mad because they didn't pay him as a consultant of this documentary. So what else do you expect when you accept money from those you know have less than the truth at heart......
quote:Why do you have to find it in the Pleistocene? We find it just out of the Pleistocene regardless a narrow nose does not make you more cold adapted than a Neanderthal.
Originally posted by Gor:
quote:Can you find a single Pleistocene fossil from Africa with these features?
Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes:
I find the location questionable with the way tropical Africa produces narrow features and non-prognathic faces
quote:
Originally posted by Gor:
With that said, I don't think the bronze skin Tut reconstruction is biased at all.
quote:--Carles Lalueza-Fox
Figure 2 | Ancestral variants around the SLC45A2 (rs16891982, above) and SLC24A5 (rs1426654, below) pigmentation genes in the Mesolithic genome.
The SNPs around the two diagnostic variants (red arrows) in these two genes were analysed. The resulting haplotype comprises neighbouring SNPs that are also absent in modern Europeans (CEU) (n = 112) but present in Yorubans (YRI) (n = 113). This pattern confirms that the La Braña 1 sample is older than the positive-selection event in these regions. Blue, ancestral; red, derived.
quote:.
Abstract
During an excavation headed by the German Institute for Archaeology, Cairo, at the tombs of the nobles in Thebes-West, Upper Egypt, three types of tissues from different mummies were
sampled to compare 13 well known rehydration methods for mummified tissue with three newly
developed methods. Furthermore, three fixatives were tested with each of the rehydration fluids.
Meniscus (fibrocartilage), skin, and a placenta were used for this study. The rehydration and
fixation procedures were uniform for all methods.
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 (approxi-
mately 1550-1080 BC).
Skin
Skin sections showed particularly good tissue
preservation, although cellular outlines were never distinct. Although much of the epidermis had
already separated from the dermis, the remaining
epidermis often was preserved well (Fig. 1).
The basal epithelial cells were packed with melanin as expected for specimens of Negroid origin.
In the dermis, the hair follicles, hair, and sebaceous and sweat glands were readily apparent (Fig. 2). Blood vessels, but no red blood cells, and small peripheral nerves were identified unambiguously (Fig. 3). The subcutaneous layer showed loose connective tissue fibers attached to the dermis, and fat cell remnants were observed.
To evaluate the influence of postmortum tissue
decay by micro-organisms, the samples were
tested for the presence of fungi using silver
staining
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
