...
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 astenb: [QB] zarahan My bad if you felt offended but let me break down what I am talking about. 1st in foremost there is NO POINT in posting that long winded image of data you post. Everyone here has read all the sources and any one who has not will just skip past it. it is not in an easy format where individuals can easily find free papers. To address your points individually. 1. The presense of Nilo-Saharans should be reinforced because it seems likely that they are the dominant type in the Nile Valley that came from the Sahara. Period. Its a shame no one seems to talk about them. Lets not project the genetics of the modern people back on the ancients. Lets instead work forward. If most of Egyptians ancestors come from the Sahara........and Nilo Saharans were in the Sahara then why are we talking about Horners that expanded northward via the Red Sea? The results of the Amarna mummies indicate just maybe we should not be talking about Horners and Afroasiatic people REGARDLESS of the Fact Egyptians language is Afro-Asiatic. Maybe Ancient Egyptian was the Nile Valley are Lingua franca as Hausa is the West African lingua franca? Basically in the same that NE African Afriasians PREDATE the now dominant Eurasians in Egypt - Nilo-Saharans and likely NILOTICS predate the the Afroasiatics. None of the "Old Data" that we deal with indicates that. The Amarna results indicate that VERY well with the Horn African affinity being minuscule to the Great Lakes, Southern African and even West African affinity. I will define "Old" later. 2 - I cant see where i said "Slight" but anyway my post was not to "SNUB" Afroasiatic speakers in favor of Nilo-Saharans. My point was to give an alternative view based on data that is not brought up here often. In bavauls book when he talks about "Black Genesis" notice he is not talking about Black Afroasiatic speakers. Instead the Nilo-Saharan Tibbou. 3 - If Egyptians have a recenet ethnogenesis based on the mixture of Different African groups there ARE no "Egyptians" proper where a distinction could be made between them and Sudanese that far back. [b]There is no difference between the Nilo-Saharans coming from Southern Libya into the western Desert to the Egyptian Nile valley..............vs kin to the south that come into the Nubian Desert at Nabta Playa...........vs those even more south that Enter Darfur and Khartoum in geographic Sudan.[/b] The same can be said for the Eastern groups. 4 - There is nothing wrong with Goode, Raxter, Keita etc. But we all know that data is "Old" around HERE. There is nothing NEW we can learn from Goode and Keita around HERE - their evidence has been exhausted unless you are re-assessing it under a different hypothesis. That is why we laugh when Lioness post "Old" studies from 2008 around HERE. They have been broken down already and no longer come up. In speaking of "New" data I am talking about things we havent seen before, particularly things published by Africans. 5 - YOu are right, i have not posted too much to egyptsearch of the past few years. Mainly because I have been reading Books instead of PDF. Plus the Euro-Clowns have take over. Best believe though when there are things to be said I chime in. I think you need to go back of the DNA tribes post and see the substance that I contributed. 6 - Yep in the ancient saharan watercourse thread I referenced what was already posted. Sure I should have provided some citations but I am not working from specific short articles that say specific things to site. WHen reading a collection of books overtime sometimes you just have to summarize it in your own words. In the future I will provide sources, thats fair. My data is confidential at this point :) . Soon enough though. 7 - Nope wrong on this. I dont know how many times it has happened. You go to google and look for something and it leads you back to Egyptseach where something is being quoted. That is not good. Or it leads you back to some website with 1000 quotes....that is not good either. People searching for Africana subjects on Google don't want to learn through the repetition and memorization of quotes. It is much better for a person to reach a site where the topic is being discussed in someones OWN words based on the OWN observation of what they have read or know by experience. THAT is the reason why I write long blocks of text with no source. THAT is what makes the discussion of the same idea and evidence DIFFERENT based on the person writing the post. That is what made E.S. great not sitting around Circle Jerking the same data. This is the entire idea of a [b]DISCUSSION[/b] board. It should be used to discuss not fight off euro-clown trolls unless there are periodic smackdowns to be laid. If folks want a source for a specific idea then they need to ask for it otherwise we should assume the reader is already familiar with the idea. I think its past the point on this site where everything needs to be sourced. Why should we have to SOURCE ides on limb proportion data or the migrations of Afrasians from the Horn of Africa north? That is common knowledge from what we have learned. If you look at all the threads on all the different sites talking about the Amarna data (the last big thing) E.S. is the only site that stands out because the discussion went OFF the usual path and studies and ideas unseen before were talked about and referenced. Readers can actually LEARN something from that thread. Endless quotes do no make a reader THINK. Look at Explorers blog, its excellent as were most of his posts here. 8 - Again nothing is wrong with old data. "Stale" data is really the issue around here. Much of the conference data cannot be disclosed because some of it is not published yet. I am waiting on a video. From the video I can see what was is included and taken out. But folks have to take advantage of new research. Oh yeah, [b]We had the largest DNA testing company giving away FREE DNA kits of Black folks and only 1 or 2 people get one - Are you kidding me![/b] Analyzing personal DNA results of people of Afican descent would have added a breatht of fresh air to a dying forum...didnt happen but hey I tried. 9 - I gave one example in google. I gave the specifics of what I find useful, maybe others will to. Lead a horse to water, maybe it will drink. Also there is a website from one of those searches that has over hundreds articles/abstracts all on once site. Most of it hasnt ever been touched. The idea is, instead of searching for subjects search for articles...many of the articles will be unfamiliar to the board. 10 - Well somethings are confidential, you can hope that they will be released but maybe not. if there is an enemy they need to be attacked from a different angle. Euroclowns are like rats and roaches. You can only poison them for so long but after a while that poison is like food to them. "Louisville Slugger" is a perfect example. Cant comment on him personally but his methods of spamming and profanity only exist to get him booted and banned from every website available. There is a certain what to say things and it gets to a point where you cannot just say whatever you want to say, any way you want to say it. If a geneticist or anthropologist was familiar with the posts and content of "Louisville Slugger" what do you think would happen if he sent them an email asking for clarification on a specific point? :( Do you think he represents the best and brightest? "The Bass" emails scientists and gets answers because he keeps it professional, his web presence is not 'off the chain'. Brandon sends emails and gets results because he is a Student and will publish one day. Real discussions is what got National Geogrphic to refute Egyptsearch. At this point though, I am on old ass man and have real life stuff to deal with. My focus has changed to knowing for the sake of knowing, forget the trolls. People that had genuine opposing ideas are interesting but as for trolls....For the most part why bother. I will end with this, [b]we can agree to disagree about everything.[/b] I will not question YOUR knowledge about anything. But I will say we should not be doing Data Dumps. Sure we can do it but it is not the "Best Answer". It allows readers to cheat. It also allows them to accumulate numbers and facts they may no know the true meaning of. PLUS it gives easy access to the Euroclowns......there are some facts they dont even DESERVE to known. With data dumps the students NEVER become teachers. Notice how the "third generation" of Egyptsearch users never really branched out? They are being handicapped. They are like the butterfly breaking out the cocoon that some human decided to assist by cutting open the cocoon so the butterfly could escape. Sounds good but that butter fly never received the stress of breaking out of the cocoon and the blood was never pushed into the wings...butterfly can now never fly. ;) I want Wikipedia to have good well rounded information but i am against editing it myself. It creates Wiki-scholars. [/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