...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Deshret
»
OT: 100 things you SHOULD know about Africa
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mustafino: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Sundiata: Firstly, I just need to say that you have no life what so ever! HaHA! Now, I disagree about numbers 1 and 2 being unremarkable because these people later traveled across the entire planet, adapted, and survived in order to make way for coons like you.[/QUOTE]And coons like you. Doesn't change the fact that they didn't look like you or me. [QUOTE]You'll have to show a source for your claim about #5, I think you're lying, Europeans weren't even white at the time anyways. I believe this to be the era of the Gramaldi Black Man.[/QUOTE]One, Grimaldi man was actually a boy and his mother. They were found among Cor-Magnon. An outlier. So they were hardly the majority. Finally we have no clue as to Grimaldi's skin color. Back on topic. Whatever colors Europeans had at the time, they were still European. [QUOTE]#8 The Sphinx indeed is debatable, but evidence suggests that it goes back to predynastic times.[/QUOTE][URL=http://www.hallofmaat.com/modules.php?name=Articles&file=article&sid=43]Geologic Study of the Sphinx[/URL] [URL=http://www.hallofmaat.com/modules.php?name=Articles&file=article&sid=41]More Sphinx Debate: He said, I say... James Harrell responds to Robert Schoch[/URL] [URL=http://www.hallofmaat.com/modules.php?name=Articles&file=article&sid=40]Comments on the Geological Evidence for the Sphinx's Age[/URL] [URL=http://www.hallofmaat.com/modules.php?name=Articles&file=article&sid=35]More Sphinx Debate: He Said ... I Say[/URL] [URL=http://www.hallofmaat.com/modules.php?name=Articles&file=article&sid=29]The Sphinx Controversy: Another Look at the Geological Evidence[/URL] [URL=http://www.hallofmaat.com/modules.php?name=Articles&file=article&sid=23]Age of the Sphinx[/URL] [URL=http://www.hallofmaat.com/modules.php?name=Articles&file=article&sid=22]Notes and Photographs on the West-Schoch Sphinx Hypothesis[/URL] [URL=http://www.hallofmaat.com/modules.php?name=Articles&file=article&sid=21]Deterioration of the Stone of the Great Sphinx[/URL] [URL=http://www.hallofmaat.com/modules.php?name=Articles&file=article&sid=13]The ARCE Sphinx Project - A Preliminary Report[/URL] [QUOTE]#9 Nubia has already been confirmed as the first Monarchy in history, this is indisputable. No need to obscure the facts. http://www.homestead.com/wysinger/qustul.html[/QUOTE] Not quite Abydos and Naqada predate Qustul http://xoomer.alice.it/francescoraf/hesyra/dynasty00.htm http://www.narmer.pl/dyn/00en.htm Also read [url= http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0022-2968(198507)44%3A3%3C185%3ADAT%22P%3E2.0.CO%3B2-J]here[/url] While you are at it, look up: Bruce B. Williams, The Qustul Incense Burner and the Case for a Nubian Origin of Ancient Egyptian Kingship; Joseph W. Wegner or just read this [URL=http://groups.google.com/group/alt.history.ancient-egypt/msg/06821b92af4eb822?]response[/URL] [QUOTE]#10, this would seem to suggest a "sub-saharan" body plan, as north Africa is not in the "Tropics" idiot. You must of missed the phrase "Black African", even though we all know there were no "White" Africans at that time anyways. Here's the actual study. http://www.homestead.com/wysinger/egyptian_body_proportions.pdf [/QUOTE]Already read the study. I remember a part in the abstract. "The change found in body plan is suggested to be the result of the later groups having a more tropical (Nilotic) form than the preceding populations." The White claim is of course a strawman. The fact remains earlier groups had a less tropical form. Also, let's not forget that Dr. Kamal from the Cairo Med school sampled DNA from construction workers at the pyramids and stated they were similar in pattern to that of modern Egyptians. Multi ethnic. [QUOTE]#17. How do you figure that India did it 1,000 years earlier, and if so who cares? This is a list about Africa, and obviously it was an independent development, Europeans and Native Americans were shitting in caves at that time. I give the "Black' Dravidians props for their accomplishments.[/QUOTE]I'm not Pacal. But I am sure he had his sources. Props to all shitters.[/quote] [QUOTE]#21. I have no idea, but to assume outside involvment with out direct evidence doesn't pass the test of Occam's razor and exposes you as a biased crab.[/QUOTE]I don't agree with Pacal on the Jewish angle. But trade does create sharing of ideas. [QUOTE]The Meroitic script is an alphabet of Egyptian hieroglyphic and Demotic origin that was used to write the Meroitic language of the Kingdom of Meroë by at least c. 200 BC — and possibly also the Nubian language of the successor Nubian kingdoms, that was later written in a Greek uncial alphabet which adopted three of the old Meroitic glyphs. Being primarily alphabetic, the Meroitic script worked in quite a different way from Egyptian hieroglyphs. Some scholars, e.g. Haarmann, believe that the Greek alphabet played a role in its development, primarily because Meroitic had letters for vowels; although in other respects it did not function much like Greek. The Meroitic script was essentially alphabetic, but with a default vowel /a/ assumed unless another vowel was written. A consonant by itself was indicated by the vowel /e/ (schwa) following the symbol. That is, the two letters me represented both the syllable /me/ and the consonant /m/ by itself, while the syllable ma was written with one letter, and mi with two. Some other syllables had special glyphs. In this sense, it is properly a 'semi-syllabic' script, only vaguely reminiscent of the Indian abugida alphabets that arose around the same time. Several syllable-final consonants, such as /n/ and /s/, were often omitted.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]#25, no one cares about your undirected doubts, you're not an authority on ancient Ghana, debunk it or stay in the corner.[/QUOTE]Again, I am not Pacal, but here goes. The claim: [QUOTE][i]25. Kumbi Saleh, the capital of Ancient Ghana, flourished from 300 to 1240 AD. Located in modern day Mauritania, archaeological excavations have revealed houses, almost habitable today, for want of renovation and several storeys high. They had underground rooms, staircases and connecting halls. Some had nine rooms. One part of the city alone is estimated to have housed 30,000 people.[/i][/QUOTE]What others claim: [QUOTE][i]The empire's capital was built at Kumbi Saleh on the edge of the Sahara. The capital was actually two cities six miles apart separated by a six-mile road. But settlements between the cities became so dense due to the influx of people coming to trade, that it merged into one. Most of the houses were built of wood and clay, but wealthy and important residents lived in homes of wood and stone. This large metropolis of over 30,000 people remained divided after its merger forming two distinct areas within the city.[/i][/QUOTE]While he claims one part of the city alone had 30,000+ people, it seems the reality is that ot was the merging of two cities in their entirety that led to a population of 30,000+ people. [QUOTE]#28. Give me a source that says Europe or Arabia used Cheques as currency in 951 A.D., if you can't do that your ranting is worthless.[/QUOTE]The modern cheque comes from the Persian چک chek,, a written vow to pay for goods when they were delivered, to avoid money having to be transported across dangerous terrain. During the third century AD, banks in Persia and other territories in the Persian empire under Sassanid Empire also issued letters of credit known as Sakks and is the root of the word cheque. http://www.businesspme.com/uk/articles/finance/14/cheque.html [QUOTE]#29. This isn't "Hyperboyle" by the author, he quoted a medieval source, take it up with the source. And per capita I'm quite sure Ghana shitted all over China at that time. Besides, the claim was made about the King, and not Ghana its self, quit resorting to straw men.[/QUOTE]It is a hyperbole by the person quoted. Nice try. That doesn't mean it is evidence, and that is exactly what Pacal said. Where is the evidence the king of Ghana was the "richest king on the face of the earth?" [QUOTE]#30. I admit it sounds a little far fetched, but if these elements were indigenous to America, maybe it should be looked into.[/QUOTE]Of course a source would have been good and mention of the evidence of these indigenous elements. [QUOTE]#32. Who cares about the Romans, they had legs too. This is about Africa, it isn't a contest as you make it out to be.[/QUOTE]Robin sure does make it sound lke he is claiming firsts. Pacal was probably just responding to that. [QUOTE]#35. You're such a vindicative creature.. This is the Yoruba's trade mark and what they're known for. http://hearstmuseum.berkeley.edu/outreach/pdfs/yoruba_teaching_kit.pdf [/QUOTE]LOL. All he asked for was a source. Many places have been known for similar things. But the quote claims a direct comparison. Where is the evidence of being better than the other cultures mentioned? [QUOTE]#39. Provide a source that states China was richer than Mali at the time. How?[/QUOTE]Again that is Pacal, but I can say it was one of the wealthiest. I can give examples of it. Can you give examples of Mali's Wealth to juxtapose in supporting Robins claim based on a TV show that it was the wealthiest? http://afe.easia.columbia.edu/webcourse/key_points/kp_6.htm http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4593717.stm http://www.colby.edu/ming/Recent_Trends.doc [QUOTE]#40. You fool, There's no way to know for sure if he made it or not, but the fact that Abubakari made a voyage across the Atlantic is well documented, the debate is rather he made it all the way across or not. You can speculate what you will, I can't say either way.[/QUOTE]That he started a voyage toward someplace in the Atlantic is documented. That he made it there or sank is not. No evidence of his arrival in the Americas. [QUOTE]#42. Stop using the same terminology and expand your limited vocabulary, you're being repetitive. Anyways, Again, he quotes a source, this is not "hyperbole" idiot, these are not his words.[/QUOTE]They are a hyperbole of the person quoted. I will relay your complaint of his paucity of words to Pacal. :D [QUOTE]#44. Haha, what use is it to question the quote? How about you look him up yourself, then come back and debunk it if you find it dubious, for what I have no idea.[/QUOTE]Again, that would be Pacal. The quote comes from: [IMG]http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/2738402348.01._SCLZZZZZZZ_SS500_.jpg[/IMG] Written in 1989. I make no claims as to it's accuracy or innacuracy. [QUOTE]#45. Everything about Timbuktu is confirmed and documented, it would be a real stretch to say that these facts are fabricated, you can read about Timbuktu any where.[/QUOTE]Interesting how it reached it's zenith in the 16th century bot only a population of 40,000 http://worldheritage.heindorffhus.dk/frame-MaliTimbuktu.htm While London has been estimated from 50 to 100 thousand during the 14th century http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3659/is_200506/ai_n15845444/pg_4 [QUOTE]#46. I'm tired of that "Hyperbole" word, vary your speech pattern you ignorant drone. Again, he quotes a source, you're reaching.[/QUOTE]Again, the source was using hyperbole. Any more? [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3