posted 17 January 2005 11:46 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by solar:

Why do you choose to be offended? My statements are not anymore out of context the the previous ones I've read. I too wade through your spam to see any truth in it to test it. The site link that I gave you has many mummies that have been 'tested' with forensic science. If you choose to be offended that is your own perspective. As for my statement about the white man well I find it a naturally nice statement made on a holiday for the black man called Martin Luther King here in the USA, who worked to redeem the black man. Perhaps it's the appreciation of the perspectives that is sorely lacking in this room, because the ignorant too should have their say. Shall I dig through this site and give you worthy examples of your the information you are looking for to defend your ingorant remarks of the site? The context of it is just as good if not better that your flattery of the white race phenotypes links. How crude you are.

---

posted 17 January 2005 12:21 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
Solar: Just because you choose to be offensive doesn't mean you succeed in offending. You can "March" until the Fuhrer comes back for all we care. lol.

---

posted 17 January 2005 12:25 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
Solar: Just because you choose to be offensive doesn't mean you succeed in offending. You can "March" until the Fuhrer comes back for all we care. lol.

---

Solar writes: "LOL I'm not german, I'm American."

posted 17 January 2005 12:44 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
Solar writes: "LOL I'm not german, I'm American."

No one cares. You're an idiot and troll. lol.

---

posted 17 January 2005 12:58 PM            

quote:

---

Like I said the truth is self evident.

---

quote:

---

You're offended that ancient eygpt could been started by what we call a WHITE phenotype with RED hair

---

Here is something to help disinfect:

Egyptology: Hanging in the Hair
by Anu M'bantu and Fari Supia
F0R YEARS, EGYPTOLOGY has been fighting a losing battle to hold onto an ancient Egypt that is Caucasian or, at worst, sun-tanned Caucasian.

At the 1974 UNESCO conference Egyptology was dealt a fatal blow. Two African scholars wiped the floor with 18 world-renowned Egyptologists. They proved in 11 different categories of evidence that the ancient Egyptians were Africans (Black). Following that beating, Egyptology has been on its knees praying to be saved by science. Their last glimmer of hope has been the hair on Egyptian mummies.

The mummies on display in the world's museums exhibit Caucasoid-looking hair, some of it brown and blonde. These mummies include Pharaoh Seqenenre Tao of the 17th dynasty and the 19th dynasty's Rameses II. As one scholar put it: "The most common hair colour, then as now, was a very dark brown, almost black colour although natural auburn and even rather surprisingly blonde hair are also to be found."

Many Black scholars try skillfully to avoid the hair problem. This is a mistake!

Ancient Africa
Home
In 1914, a white doctor in Detroit initiated divorce proceeding against his wife whom he suspected of being a "closet Negro". At the trial, the Columbia University anthropologist, Professor Franz Boas (1858-1942), was called upon as a race expert. Boas declared: "If this woman has any of the characteristics of the Negro race it would be easy to find them . . . one characteristic that is regarded as reliable is the hair. You can tell by microscopic examination of a cross-section of hair to what race that person belongs."

With this revelation, trichology (the scientific analysis of hair) reached the American public. But what are these differences?

The cross-section of a hair shaft is measured with an instrument called a trichometer. From this you can get measurements for the minimum and maximum diameter of a hair The minimum measurement is then divided by the maximum and then multiplied by a hundred. This produces an index. A survey of the scientific literature produces the following breakdown:

San, Southern African 55.O0

Zulu, Southern African 55.O0

Sub-Saharan Africa 60.O0

Tasmanian (Black) 64.70

Australian (Black) 68.00

Western European 71.20

Asian Indian 73.00

Navajo American 77.00

Chinese 82.60

In the early 1970s, the Czech anthropologist Eugen Strouhal examined pre-dynastic Egyptian skulls at Cambridge University. He sent some samples of the hair to the Institute of Anthropology at Charles University, Prague, to be analyzed. The hair samples were described as varying in texture from "wavy" to "curly" and in colour from "light brown" to "black". Strouhal summarized the results of the analysis:

"The outline of the cross-sections of the hairs was flattened, with indices ranging from 35 to 65. These peculiarities also show the Negroid inference among the Badarians (pre-dynastic Egyptians)."

The term "Negroid influence" suggests intermixture, but as the table suggests this hair is more "Negroid" than the San and the Zulu samples, currently the most Negroid hair in existence!

In another study, hair samples from ten 18th-25th dynasty individuals produced an average index of 51! As far back as 1877, Dr. Pruner-Bey analyzed six ancient Egyptian hair samples. Their average index of 64.4 was similar to the Tasmanians who lie at the periphery of the African-haired populations.

A team of Italian anthropologists published their research in the Journal of Human Evolution in 1972 and 1980. They measured two samples consisting of 26 individuals from pre-dynastic, 12th dynasty and 18th dynasty mummies. They produced a mean index of 66.50
Royal Ontario Museum, Canada
Young Bishari's of North Africa, Egypt, 1890
Click photo to enlarge
Ancient Egyptian wig is made of human hair attached to a net.

18th Dynasty Egypt
The overall average of all four sets of ancient Egyptian hair samples was 60.02. Sounds familiar . ., just check the table!

Since microscopic analysis shows ancient Egyptian hair to be completely African, why does the hair look Caucasoid? Research has given us the answers.

Hair is made of keratin protein. Keratin is composed of amino acid chains called polypeptides. In a hair, two such chains are called cross-chain polypeptides. These are held together by disulphide bonds. The bulk of the hair, the source of its strength and curl, is called the cortex. The hair shafts are made of a protective outer layer called the cuticle.

We are informed by Afro Hair - A Salon Book, that chemicals for bleaching, penning and straightening hair must reach the cortex to be effective. For hair to be permed or straightened the disulphide bonds in the cortex must be broken. The anthropologist Daniel Hardy writing in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology, tells us that keratin is stable owing to disulphide bonds. However, when hair is exposed to harsh conditions it can lead to oxidation of protein molecules in the cortex, which leads to the alteration of hair texture, such as straightening.

Two British anthropologists, Brothwell and Spearman, have found evidence of cortex keratin oxidation in ancient Egyptian hair. They held that the mummification process was responsible, because of the strong alkaline substance used. This resulted in the yellowing and browning of hair as well as the straightening effect.

This means that visual appearance of the hair on mummies cannot disguise their racial affinities. The presence of blonde and brown hair on ancient Egyptian mummies has nothing to do with their racial identity and everything to do with mummification and the passage of time. As the studies have shown, when you put the evidence under a microscope the truth comes out. At last, Egyptology's prayers have been answered. It has been put out of its misery.
As have you. Now troll off.

posted 17 January 2005 01:06 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by solar:
Like I said the truth is self evident. You're offended that ancient eygpt could been started by what we call a WHITE phenotype with RED hair...and the blacks simple built upon what came natural to these settlers. LOL that's really your case in point isn't it by your remarks. Shall we knock off another face of a statue so we can set your head on top it? LOL

---

Did you recently just come over from the Stormfront message board?

posted 17 January 2005 01:17 PM            

You then prove that Y is not a good option and claim X, ignoring the whole range of options in ~X that are not Y.

The other is where Y is a proper superset of ~X. Saying "Either X or Y must be true" when Y is a superset of ~X is not fallacious, but saying "X and Y can't both be true" is.

My link on phenotpes of course discussed the wide ranges due to climate etc. Looks much like rubbish to me. . .so sail on wishful thinker.

[This message has been edited by solar (edited 17 January 2005).]

posted 17 January 2005 01:29 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by solar:
[B]
Yeah well I'll get back with you on this.

---

posted 17 January 2005 02:22 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by solar:
[B]
Yeah well I'll get back with you on this.

---

In the mean time. You march, I mean run along now. And give our love to the fellow tinheads, I mean Titans. Thank you for playing. [/QUOTE]

posted 17 January 2005 02:24 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by solar:
[B]
Yeah well I'll get back with you on this.

---

In the mean time. You march, I mean run along now. And give our love to the fellow tinheads, I mean Titans. Thank you for playing. [/QUOTE]

However you don't entertain me with your deluded conceptions of yourself. . .so think I will find a more interesting site that has something truthful to share with a bit or a character who has more balance in their personality. . .you are so incredibly ugly. . .and I don't have to look at your face to figure that one out. . .idiot

[This message has been edited by solar (edited 17 January 2005).]

posted 17 January 2005 02:27 PM            

quote:

---

think I will find a more interesting site

---

posted 17 January 2005 02:34 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
[QUOTE] think I will find a more interesting site

---

Bye, take care now.

You can't stand it when you stink is uncovered can you? Tinhead titan idiot and all other names you call use to reveberate...back to you

You haven't run me off . . .you sick little brown bird
(meaning no character. . .look up 'brown bird') I might not be the expert in egyptian 'ology' and niether are you for that fact. . . but I know the character when I see it. yep
[This message has been edited by solar (edited 17 January 2005).

posted 17 January 2005 03:54 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by EGyPT2005:

Did you recently just come over from the Stormfront message board?

---

posted 17 January 2005 05:46 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by solar:
Well, didn't know what the stormfront message boards were so I looked it up. Well good for them, some white nationalist group have formed a board. I praise their effort. Don't you want to work with white groups that maybe formed in the future, hmm? Why, we have been working with the black groups. I think we should form some very strong groups and go after what ever discriminates against us in our own boundaries and civilization. Why can't the whites have a board too? Why can't the whites have a civil rights movement too? hmmm? Seems fair and logical to me. Want to lump me in a group. . .ok You want someone to hate? hmmm ok

---

Civil rights over an African civilization? Are white folks really that much down that, it is a must for them to own foreign civilizations that have nothing to do with them? One thing is for sure, Africans aren't the ones doing the fantasizing here!

posted 17 January 2005 06:24 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by supercar:
Civil rights over an African civilization? Are white folks really that much down that, it is a must for them to own foreign civilizations that have nothing to do with them? One thing is for sure, Africans aren't the ones doing the fantasizing here!

---

Supercar. . .who says the hypothetical group would be formed in an african civilization? I am from another country than egypt. You don't make any sense and it's obvious you didn't read the earlier posts.

posted 17 January 2005 06:29 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by solar:
Supercar. . .who says the hypothetical group would be formed in an african civilization? I am from another country than egypt. You don't make any sense and it's obvious you didn't read the earlier posts. It's not all about your egocentric africa image.

[This message has been edited by solar (edited 17 January 2005).]

---

posted 17 January 2005 06:46 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by solar:
[B] Supercar. . .who says the hypothetical group would be formed in an african civilization? I am from another country than egypt. You don't make any sense and it's obvious you didn't read the earlier posts.

---

posted 17 January 2005 08:32 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by supercar:
Rasol read my mind correctly. Other than that, all I have to say, is that your reply to my comment shows you that lack of basic history knowledge isn't your only problem, but so is "reading"!

---

posted 17 January 2005 08:41 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by solar:
Isn't it true that rosal and supercar are the same absurd entity masquerading under another alias. Like it's so transparent. You don't have to be a mind reader.

---