...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
Ancient Egyptians DNA is Less Sub Saharan than modern Egyptian DNA.
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Nodnarb: [qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes: [qb]Greenberg on the other hand said - “Afroasiatic languages are spoken both by Caucasian and Negro peoples. The Cushites and EthiopianSemites are often classed as Caucasoids. The Egyptians, Berbers, and remaining Semitic people are indisputably Caucasian while Chad speakers are Negroid.” This leads me to believe that he was trying to fit linguistics with dated dishonest psuedo-oide sciences.[/qb][/QUOTE]Greenberg may have had outdated ideas about what the AE and other Northeast African populations (assuming by "Egyptians" he was referring to the native AE). But that very quote goes to show you that he's [i]not[/i] trying to correlate linguistic categories with "race". If anything, the message that I take away from that quote is that he's cautioning against a simplistic equation of language with biological affinity. How can you interpret a statement like "Afrasan is spoken by both 'Negro' and 'Caucasian' people" as correlating Afrasan with either of those old racial constructs. Swenet is in a better position than I to explain why the Afrasan model fits all the data better than this proposed pan-African lingustic phylum. But what I want to ask again is why it should matter. The proto-Afrasan cradle is still located within Africa, most probably in Northeast Africa immediately south of Egypt (e.g. the northern Sudan). Even if you take pre-OOA into account, that doesn't make it any more "Caucasian" than it is, say, "Papuan". [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/V7lVZAV.jpg[/IMG] Come to think of it, when you consider both the geographic and chronological proximity proto-Afrasan has to AE, I think it's reasonable to suppose most AE didn't look very different from the people occupying that area at that time. If any place in Africa is an ideal candidate for the predominant AE origin spot, this sliver of the Sudanese/Ethiopian coast is it. (Though admittedly I am assuming that the biological affinity of a given Afrasan population to the original proto-Afrasan population would increase once you got closer to the linguistic origin point, and that this pattern of affinity would fade out once you moved further away from that point. But I am open to correction on that point.) [/qb][/QUOTE]That map contradicts African history and what linguist are demonstrating. My point about pre-OOA is that linguist connect Indo-Euro and Sumerian to Niger-Congo. They did this before Greenberg. This tells me that Niger-Congo is much older than the Greenberg model which means that phenotype does not factor. [QUOTE]Originally posted by beyoku: [qb] @Fourty2Tribes. Ask yourself this question. Do you think the physical measurements that were used to describe "Caucasoid" and or "Negroid" exist in human populations? [/qb][/QUOTE]Thats like the one about a tree falling in the woods :D . It depends on who is defining it. After the two brothers were said to be Negroid and Caucasoid I gave up on oid science. Then you have the 'Mechtoids'. [/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