...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
Bogus Wikipedia moles exposed and debunked
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: [QB] [b]Here is the perfect example: Zarahan posted some data about Afroasiatic and then some evidence of its influence...the problem is that data reinforces the presence of Nilo-Saharan speakers and Nilotics in the Sahara and Nile Valley, not Afrasians. This is not to say anything bad about Zarahan, but the interpretation of that data has changed based on new evidence or even old but better evidence. The quote does speak of Sudanese but it seems like it gives them a minor role when really its the opposite. You will be very surpised what can be found from very very simple Google searches.[/b] ^^Your argument is dubious on several counts. 1- First, why should not the presence of Nilo-Saharans or Nilotics people be reinforced in any presentation on the Nile Valley, alongside Afroasians? Please elucidate. 2- Second, the quotes above specifically mention the linkage of Egyptian with Afro-Asiatic languages. Since this links Egyptians with other Afro-Asiatic speakers, how exactly does the data above then "slight" Afroasian speakers on linkages? Do tell. 3- Third you say "[i]The quote does speak of Sudanese but it seems like it gives them a minor role."[/i] How so? The data above clearly links ancient Egyptians with Sudanese on physical and cultural indices. SO tell us how the Sudanese presence is being "slighted"? 4- Fourth, you speak of "old data" but how exactly is GOdde 2009, Raxter 2011, Raxter and Ruff 2008, Keita 2008 and Pinhasi & Stock. 2011 "old data"? What makes it "old" - because you say so? That's not good enough. 5- Fifth, you speak of "TONS" of "new data" out there but yourself proffer very little, indeed you have done very little contribution of "new" data to ES in the last 2 years, either by way of analysis or by way of concise summaries to build the database. If you have this supposed "ton" of new information how come you post so little of it? In yet another thread you reference the DNA Tribes data, but it was Bass who posted the information not you, guru of newness. If you had all this "current" data at your fingertips, how come you never get around to posting it, and adding value to the database? 6- Sixth, you yourself have done little re citations in some instances. Let's take one of your postings for example. IN one of your most recent postings on ancient Saharan watercourses for example you reference maps posted at least 3 years ago on ES. Why such "old" information, oh guru of "newness"? In the same thread you proffer a theory about Nilo-Saharans saying [i]"This theory has kinks but thus is my story and I am sticking to it"[/i], yet fail to provide any credible citation in support. You merely assert. Where is your vaunted "new data" in support of the theory you are "sticking" with? 7- Seventh, your assertions re old, new and GOogle searches are laughable. You say in the Limb thread: [i]”..start putting things into our own words and listing sources." There has to be some NEW research and some NEW hypothesis. What is happening NOW is when people try to research Africana they see a same list of stuff on every search engine. It reduces the research pool of Africana data to an area that is actually QUITE SMALL on the internet. Anyone trying to learn something new just seems the SAME STUFF wherever they go.”[/i] But summaries are given both in text, in commentary (see numerous threads), and in the graphics, with detailed sources listed. It is up to the reader to further investigate or, gasp, POST THEIR OWN "NEW" information. You seldom do either. Furthermore it is nonsensical to say that [i]"when people try to research Africana they see a same list of stuff on every search engine.[/i]" SO let me get this straight. If I look up the Badarians, the ONLY links that will appear is to similar ES posting above? Nonsense. And how exactly does the information posted on ES, "reduce the research pool of Africana data"? Simplistic BS. WHat? The above data somehow, by some magic algorithm, blots out all other Google search results, so that ONLY what is "approved" by Zarahan shows up? aha haha ahahahahah haha hah.. Your lack of elementary logic is astounding. Would that I had such godly powers to "reduce the research pool of Africana data".. And keep in mind, if I choose to post an update, or “the listing” to counter trolls, or illustrate a point for my own purposes, that’s my prerogative. I don't care who doesn't like it. 8- Eight, even when you come up with “new” info, you fail to follow up. You did post info on a 2012 African Genetics Conference, but some of the well known names and authors themselves pack their work with allegedly "old" references and data. Over half the references in Tishkoff 2010- Working toward a synthesis- is over 10 years old. including Schwarcz 1988, Stringer 1989, Mercier 1993, Grouble 1986, Greenberg 1972 etc etc.. So is Tishkoff too occupoied with including "old" information? And since when is something like Redford 2001, or Vogel 1997, showing clear linkages of Egyptians with allegedly "slighted" Sudanics "inappropriate" to reference? Notably, and not surprisingly, you have not yet posted any "new" information on insights from this conference which you attended. WHat's taking you so long, "guru of the new"? 9- Ninth, your claims are contradictory. In this thread, typically, you pass to GOogle, though saying you have all this "new" info at hand, and you have added this "new" data to few other ES threads in recent years. You say "go to Google.” But your own advice contradicts your earlier statements, Earlier you said Google "only" shows this allegly "limited list of search results", and that "Africana research" was being "suppressed" or "slighted" as a result. So why do you recommend TypeZeiss go to Google if he will "only" get "limited" information? 10- Tenth, You also say: [b]”I have found specific things everyone wants to know.....but nobody knows....and I know nobody knows about them or else it would be all over the internet. [/b] If this is so, why haven’t you produced this “mystery” knowledge? You speak much of allegedly "old" information, but have done little to practice what you preach, "guru of the new".. [/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