posted
The population history of the Nile (late Pleistocene to Dynastic time)
Below a nice recap of various archeological studies about the regional continuity of the Nile populations. It was taken from a study posted below.
quote: The population history of the Nile has been of considerable recent interest and focuses on two competing hypotheses. The first suggests that the Egyptian dynasties developed in situ from the earlier Predynastic and Neolithic populations represented at sites such as el-Badari. The second scenario suggests that migration of people from western Asia led to the development of the Egyptian state (Petrie, 1920, 1939; Kantor, 1965). In general, the archaeological evidence suggests that the Egyptian state had an indigenous origin (Hassan, 1988). Two recent studies provide evidence for population dynamics in the Nile Valley throughout the Holocene. Zakrzewski (2007) demonstrates evidence for broad population continuity through time on the basis of craniometric variation, with some level of population movement . Several recent analyses of dental variation come to essentially the same conclusion (Irish, 2005, 2006; Schillaci et al., 2009). Thus, in the most general terms, there is strong evidence for population continuity along the Nile from the late Palaeolithic through the Egyptian Empire. However, the diffusion of agricultural technologies into the Nile from other regions, and the subsequent trade networks of the Egyptian empire, would have undoubtedly brought with it people and genes from other regions to varying extents through time and space.
Main points:
1 - In general, the archaeological evidence suggests that the Egyptian state had an indigenous origin 2 - Craniometry (and Dental variation) demonstrate broad population continuity through time on the basis of craniometric variation, with some level of population movement 3 - Strong evidence for population continuity along the Nile from the late Palaeolithic through the Egyptian Empire with some level of population movement 4 - Trade networks of the Egyptian empire, would have undoubtedly brought with it people and genes from other regions to varying extents through time and space.
So the main point here for us, is the STRONG evidence for population continuity in the Nile region from the late Pleistocene through the Egyptian Empire.
Taken from this study: Body Size, Skeletal Biomechanics, Mobility and Habitual Activity from the Late Palaeolithic to the Mid-Dynastic Nile Valley. Got it from here: (www.) pave.bioanth.cam.ac.uk/pdfs/033-Stock(2011HBTA)NileBiomechSize.pdf (you need to add the www. to the address, the forum doesn't allow me to post the full address)
The study by itself is also interesting as it analyses the consequences on the body of ancient specimens of the transition in the Nile from different lifestyles (hunting-gathering, pastoral, agriculture, etc).
We can also see it here:
The peopling of the Nile was the product of the populations in the A map, from inner Africa, from the South, which expanded in the Sahara and then went back along the Nile to settle down during the desertification of the Sahara in search of greener pastures.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
The problem with the Egyptians is they wasted a lot of energy making useless mountains of stone and gigantic statues of kings. They were great artists though
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Typical white perspective and understanding of the world. Tsk! Tsk! Lioness
@ ultimate. No rational person would think AE is anything but indigenous. But I am waiting on proof that migrants came into Egypt during pre-history. What are they basing this hypothesis on?
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: The problem with the Egyptians is they wasted a lot of energy making useless mountains of stone and gigantic statues of kings. They were great artists though
Salty because your Tut = Indian phuckup blew up in your face?
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: The problem with the Egyptians is they wasted a lot of energy making useless mountains of stone and gigantic statues of kings. They were great artists though
Salty because your Tut = Indian phuckup blew up in your face?
I think brother lamin would agree with me on the imperialism of the Egyptians and their grandiose king's projects. I've made such statements since I began posting
This particular wooden bust could pass for an Indian kid or a North African or Arab. People get mad when you point out that appearances cross over ethnicities, they inisit it only looks like an African
.
I never said the Egyptains came from India just that some of their art resembles Indians
Sety I
____________________________________________
This depiction of Amenhotep III looking more like a West African
“The inclusion of both early and late samples from Nubia was a necessity of the current study, which may have some implications for interpretation. Most early work considered Upper and Lower Egyptians to be genetically-distinct populations; however, more recent analyses suggest that these populations are not sufficiently distinct to consider either non-indigenous (Zakrzewski, 2007). A craniometric study found the Kerma population to be morphologically similar to a Lower Egyptian Predynastic population (Keita, 1990). Thus, while they may have existed on the margins of the growing Egyptian empire, their inclusion in comparisons of earlier Nubians and Nile Valley Predynastic samples appear warranted.” (p17)
How did I miss that?
Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: People get mad when you point out that appearances cross over ethnicities, they inisit it only looks like an African
No. You saying that was connected to your whole "AE were mixed" fairytale which you loved to spout ad nauseam. What happened? Two analyses of New Kingdom royal families happened, lol. I have no problem with you calling the AE mixed. Not if you apply that across and call Italians and Greeks mixed in the same vain, which, of course, you didn't. Not until we confronted you with this inconsistency in your argument.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: People get mad when you point out that appearances cross over ethnicities, they inisit it only looks like an African
No. You saying that was connected to your whole "AE were mixed" fairytale which you loved to spout ad nauseam. What happened? Two analyses of New Kingdom royal families happened, lol. I have no problem with you calling the AE mixed. Not if you apply that across and call Italians and Greeks mixed in the same vain, which, of course, you didn't. Not until we confronted you with this inconsistency in your argument.
Ok the Italians, Greeks and Egyptians are all mixed peoples
^^^ there, it's fair now
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Greece is a country located in Southern Europe, its mainland located at the southern end of the Balkan Peninsula. Italy is also a peninsula. Dead end outcroppings
Egypt however is at the small land bridge hub between two continents, a small geograpic bottleneck
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: The population history of the Nile (late Pleistocene to Dynastic time)
Below a nice recap of various archeological studies about the regional continuity of the Nile populations. It was taken from a study posted below.
quote: The population history of the Nile has been of considerable recent interest and focuses on two competing hypotheses. The first suggests that the Egyptian dynasties developed in situ from the earlier Predynastic and Neolithic populations represented at sites such as el-Badari. The second scenario suggests that migration of people from western Asia led to the development of the Egyptian state (Petrie, 1920, 1939; Kantor, 1965). In general, the archaeological evidence suggests that the Egyptian state had an indigenous origin (Hassan, 1988). Two recent studies provide evidence for population dynamics in the Nile Valley throughout the Holocene. Zakrzewski (2007) demonstrates evidence for broad population continuity through time on the basis of craniometric variation, with some level of population movement . Several recent analyses of dental variation come to essentially the same conclusion (Irish, 2005, 2006; Schillaci et al., 2009). Thus, in the most general terms, there is strong evidence for population continuity along the Nile from the late Palaeolithic through the Egyptian Empire. However, the diffusion of agricultural technologies into the Nile from other regions, and the subsequent trade networks of the Egyptian empire, would have undoubtedly brought with it people and genes from other regions to varying extents through time and space.
Main points:
1 - In general, the archaeological evidence suggests that the Egyptian state had an indigenous origin 2 - Craniometry (and Dental variation) demonstrate broad population continuity through time on the basis of craniometric variation, with some level of population movement 3 - Strong evidence for population continuity along the Nile from the late Palaeolithic through the Egyptian Empire with some level of population movement 4 - Trade networks of the Egyptian empire, would have undoubtedly brought with it people and genes from other regions to varying extents through time and space.
So the main point here for us, is the STRONG evidence for population continuity in the Nile region from the late Pleistocene through the Egyptian Empire.
Taken from this study: Body Size, Skeletal Biomechanics, Mobility and Habitual Activity from the Late Palaeolithic to the Mid-Dynastic Nile Valley. Got it from here: (www.) pave.bioanth.cam.ac.uk/pdfs/033-Stock(2011HBTA)NileBiomechSize.pdf (you need to add the www. to the address, the forum doesn't allow me to post the full address)
The study by itself is also interesting as it analyses the consequences on the body of ancient specimens of the transition in the Nile from different lifestyles (hunting-gathering, pastoral, agriculture, etc).
We can also see it here:
The peopling of the Nile was the product of the populations in the A map, from inner Africa, from the South, which expanded in the Sahara and then went back along the Nile to settle down during the desertification of the Sahara in search of greener pastures.
^^Good data find. Stock's writing has been noted before but your article lays out the things in 22 pages- not a summary but in detail- confirming other data in multiple lines of evidence. I have no problem with them saying that in pre-dynastic times there must have been some outside movement into Egypt. Sure. After all in the pre-dynastic, before the rise of the formal dynasties there was trade and warfare in what is now Palestine, etc. And nomads of various sorts could always have infiltrated. Small scale movement of war captives, merchants or nomads is always possible, but they would be minor players in terms of the overall population.
THis article is important in that it also contradicts those who try to use body mass as an end run marker of some sort of huge Kakakzoid influx into the Nile Valley. But as Stock et al indicate, changes in body mass are also associated with the transition to agriculture- which includes high production foraging and sedentism based on that. The Nile Valley peoples did not need NEar Eastern crops, animals or people to boost food output. Such imports indeed helped but a productive food base was already in place without relying on the "Middle East." And, No "wandering Caucasoids" are needed to give the natives variation in how they look.
Of interest is the role of diseases that cause reduction in stature and body size, again associated with transition to agriculture. Agriculture can be positive and negative as far as health- and yield a fluctuating pattern. Again, there is no fundamental need to look to mass influxes from "the Middle East" to explain fluctuations in body size.
"In this study, skeletal measures of body size were analysed to evaluate the long-term impact of the transition to agriculture in the Nile Valley. It has previously been noted that the transition to agriculture in the Nile, Valley is associated with a deterioration and subsequent improvement in health, as reflected by a dramatic increase in the frequency of linear enamel hypoplasia between the Jebel Sahaba and el-Badari samples, followed by a reduction in frequencies in subsequent populations of the Nile, including the Kerma sample (Starling and Stock, 2007). Here, we demonstrate that this transition is also associated with a modest reduction and subsequent improvement in stature and body mass. This trend could be broadly interpreted in the contextof models of a relationship between body size and nutrition. In this case, the greater body size of early hunter-gatherers may reflect the benefit of broadly-based hunting and gathering subsistence. With the onset of the Neolithic, the dietary diversity of hunter-gatherers is replaced with dietary specialization on one or a few cereal crops and the products of domestic animals. The potential nutritional implications of this are further compounded by the potential transmission of zoonotic diseases associated with living in close proximity to domestic animals, as well as related increases in population density and poor hygiene. Increasing sedentism and population density are almost universally associated with increases in infectious disease (Cohen, 1989; Steckel and Rose, 2002; Stuart-Macadam and Kent, 1992) and may underpin the reduction in stature in the Predynastic Period."
tropical redact sez: “The inclusion of both early and late samples from Nubia was a necessity of the current study, which may have some implications for interpretation. Most early work considered Upper and Lower Egyptians to be genetically-distinct populations; however, more recent analyses suggest that these populations are not sufficiently distinct to consider either non-indigenous (Zakrzewski, 2007). A craniometric study found the Kerma population to be morphologically similar to a Lower Egyptian Predynastic population (Keita, 1990). Thus, while they may have existed on the margins of the growing Egyptian empire, their inclusion in comparisons of earlier Nubians and Nile Valley Predynastic samples appear warranted.” (p17)
^^Good point, glad you highlight it. Again, this contradicts artificial attempts to split off "Nubia" separately into some insinuated "race" format. The Nubians and the Egyptians are the closest people in the Nile Valley. It also defeats attempts to artificially split off Upper Egypt as "different" from the rest of Egypt. The authors point to craniometric data but limb data also show that in that early era the proportions of northerners group with African tropical types rather than Europeans (Kemp 2005) and even Raxter/Ruff (2008) who used mostly northern samples.
Good work Amun-Ra. Keep expanding the base- keep accruing new data.
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: People get mad when you point out that appearances cross over ethnicities, they inisit it only looks like an African
No. You saying that was connected to your whole "AE were mixed" fairytale which you loved to spout ad nauseam. What happened? Two analyses of New Kingdom royal families happened, lol. I have no problem with you calling the AE mixed. Not if you apply that across and call Italians and Greeks mixed in the same vain, which, of course, you didn't. Not until we confronted you with this inconsistency in your argument.
Ok the Italians, Greeks and Egyptians are all mixed peoples
^^^ there, it's fair now
So, they were all "mulattoes" (your words) in your view?
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
Greece is a country located in Southern Europe, its mainland located at the southern end of the Balkan Peninsula. Italy is also a peninsula. Dead end outcroppings
Egypt however is at the small land bridge hub between two continents, a small geograpic bottleneck
lioness prodcutions
You were forced to apply your hybrid thesis to Greece and Italy and now you are trying to take it back. LOL!
Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: People get mad when you point out that appearances cross over ethnicities, they inisit it only looks like an African
No. You saying that was connected to your whole "AE were mixed" fairytale which you loved to spout ad nauseam. What happened? Two analyses of New Kingdom royal families happened, lol. I have no problem with you calling the AE mixed. Not if you apply that across and call Italians and Greeks mixed in the same vain, which, of course, you didn't. Not until we confronted you with this inconsistency in your argument.
Ok the Italians, Greeks and Egyptians are all mixed peoples
^^^ there, it's fair now
So, they were all "mulattoes" in your view?
yeah*, so we agree now right?
It's your word. I haven't used that word in this thread. Aren't you the guy who thinks the Iberomaurusians were Eurasian?
posted
You're trolling again. I've never claimed such. The sheer hypocrisy of your beliefs are coming out in the naked and there is nothing you can do about it, except crack a joke here and there. You try to play "the game" along, but the truth is, you don't consider any of these thoroughly admixed European people mulattoes. Whenever indigenous African people make something great and accept immigrants on their own terms, however, they're mulattoes. When genetic studies prove otherwise you try marginalize their accomplishments as unproductive outward displays of materialism.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: [QB] You're trolling again. I've never claimed such. The sheer hypocrisy of your beliefs are coming out in the naked and there is nothing you can do about it, except crack a joke here and there. You try to play "the game" along, but the truth is, you don't consider any of these thoroughly admixed European people mulattoes. Whenever indigenous African people make something great and accept immigrants on their own terms, however, they're mulattoes. When genetic studies prove otherwise you try marginalize their accomplishments as unproductive outward displays of materialism.
To indict the lioness you need actual lioness quotes, not made up psychic mind readings of the lioness but the actual quotes. Also trolling is instigating, therefore you are the troll tryin to start ish
First introduction of the word mulattoes to the thread>
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: they were all "mulattoes"
-you came out with this so I gave you what you wanted now you want to repeal it ? facebook boredum?
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: The problem with the Egyptians is they wasted a lot of energy making useless mountains of stone and gigantic statues of kings. They were great artists though
^^^^ admittedly overly negative. They were also fantastic engineers, architects, written language innovators, argrcicultural and grain storage technologists, invented papyrus sheets,
However I feel people get so obssessed on Egypt because of it's links to Western culture, influence on the Greeks etc, possible influence on Abrahamic religion, monumental stone work. It can get to the point of a continued disassociation, even embarassment about West Africa. I prefer to look at African culture on it's own terms not trying to justify it by the fact that other cultures outside of Africa were influenced by it
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: You're trolling again. I've never claimed such. The sheer hypocrisy of your beliefs are coming out in the naked and there is nothing you can do about it, except crack a joke here and there. You try to play "the game" along, but the truth is, you don't consider any of these thoroughly admixed European people mulattoes. Whenever indigenous African people make something great and accept immigrants on their own terms, however, they're mulattoes. When genetic studies prove otherwise you try marginalize their accomplishments as unproductive outward displays of materialism.
As usual Swenet is more concerned in trying to link Ancient Egyptians to the Middle East than to other indigenous African people...
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote: Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: As usual Swenet is more concerned in trying to link Ancient Egyptians to the Middle East than to other indigenous African people
You are crazy, son. That's why you were deleted from the Facebook page. Take ya medicine and keep my name out your mouth. I see you're building quite a thing for yourself citing "new" papers that are really old news.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:To indict the lioness you need actual lioness quotes
No lioness. Unlike you who "forgets" something as simple as the difference between a male and a female lineages, I and others know what you've written in the past. For instance, you once listed Sweden as your place of origin, then you said you were West African then you said you were African American. You've called AE a "mulatto" civilization numerous times in the past. That you insist you haven't in this thread is a fallacy.
Are Cypriots, Italians and Caucasians proper mulattoes in your view?
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote: Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: As usual Swenet is more concerned in trying to link Ancient Egyptians to the Middle East than to other indigenous African people
You are crazy, son. That's why you were deleted from the Facebook page. Take ya medicine and keep citing "new" papers that are old news.
Don't be an idiot, you have proven my point again in this thread.
As for you kicking me out of your facebook group. It just shows you can't take the heat. You're acting like a cry baby. Now get back to your facebook group and don't bother us again with your stupidity.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
What heat, dummy? Everyone knows you keep running in debates with me. Who are you? I don't know you from a hole in the wall. No one can vouch for you. You popped up one day and started acting like you knew a damn thing about this field and felt like you could make your mark by stating the obvious and /or disagreeing with what people say. All the while you say the stupidest sh!t I've ever heard, not realizing that every time you say something stupid you insinuate that you know next to nothing.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: What heat, dummy? Everyone knows you keep running in debates with me. Who are you? I don't know you from a hole in the wall. No one can vouch for you. You popped up one day and started acting like you knew a damn thing about this field and felt like you could make your mark by disagreeing with what people say. All the while you say the stupidest sh!t I've ever heard, not realizing that every time you say something stupid you insinuate that you know next to nothing.
So what if I disagreed with you on some points? You also disagree with me on some points. It goes both ways. I always provide argumentation to demonstrate my point of views so nobody needs blind faith to follow my argumentation.
You're just a cry baby who can't take the heat. Have nice day.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote: Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: I always provide argumentation to demonstrate my point of views so nobody needs blind faith to follow my argumentation.
What, like claiming that DNA Tribes states that the mummies have the closest relationships with any region while they keep repeating that their tests don't quantify admixture?
What about the fact that your dumbass keeps posting Rosa et al 2011's image of the distribution of E-M2 in Africa when there is no indication into that the e1b1a assignment for Ramses III harbours E-M2. You've been clued into this fact but you just keep on perpetuating your lying ass self- serving case.
Face it, you're full of sh!t, and people DO need to take your word for it on blind faith the majority of the time because when they go back, they find out that you're manipulating with what the actual source said.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: What, like claiming that DNA Tribes states that the mummies have the closest relationships with any region while they keep repeating that their tests don't quantify admixture?
I don't see the problem you have with the DNA Tribes results. They match Great Lakes, Southern Africans and West Africans more than any other population on earth (in or related to populations in the DNA Tribes database). It matches indigenous black African people. I don't see any problem. Who do you want them to match more? Middle Easterners? Modern Egyptians? Don't be ridiculous. The results are there for everyone to see. We also know Ancient Egyptians are indigenous Africans from this thread.
For one, it has been proven than Meroitic is a Nilo-Saharan language. So they were Nilo-Saharans. I guess other ethnic groups joined them along the years in this great empire. It's often the case with large empire which become major trading centers too.
In the thread dedicated to it, I said:
quote:It must be said that this also goes in line with the ancient DNA (aDNA) analysis of neolithic remains in Sudan which shows A-M13 being the main haplogroup among early settlers . A-M13 is prevalent in Sudan among modern day Dinka (62%), Shilluk (53%), Borgu (35%).
Here I just wanted to place Nilo-Saharan speakers in the region of the Kushite empire. Not as migrant but as founder. Nobody knows for sure the whole genetic profile of the Kushites population but when you know, from linguistic, that they are Nilo-Saharans you can see why I mention A-M13 since it's a prevalent haplogroup among Nilo-Saharans in Sudan. That's all.
As the Hassan paper it mentions:
quote: Accordingly, through limited on number of aDNA samples, there is enough data to suggest and to tally with the historical evidence of the dominance by Nilotic elements during the early state formation in the Nile Valley
While then he talks about the dominance of Nuba/Nubians. For me, that's enough to place Nilo-Saharans in the Kushite region during the early state formation. Nuba people and Nubians speakers are Niger-Congo (Niger Kordofanian) and Nilo-Saharan speakers respectively. We also know than Nubians arrived much later and led to the fall of the Meroitic/Kushite empire.
So I combined the two. The presence of Nilo-Saharan A-M13 in the early state formation and the fact that Meroitic is a Nilo-Saharan language. I don't think the Kushite or any ancient civilizations had only one haplogroup. That's ridiculous. Populations are always composed of many haplogroups and lineages. Larger empires often composed of many ethnic groups.
quote: What about the fact that your dumbass keeps posting Rosa et al 2011's image of the distribution of E-M2 in Africa when Ramses' e1b1a is not at all the same thing as E-M2. You've been clued into this fact but you just keep on perpetuating your lying ass self-serving case.
Many West Africans are E1b1a carriers so is Ramses III according to the study. I don't see the problem you have with that. I never claimed that West Africans are descendants of Ancient Egyptians, I just said they share common ancestors as do many other African populations between each others. West Africans carry both E-V38 and E-M2. E-V38 being ancestral to E-M2.
So Ramses III and modern West Africans share both the common E-V38 and E-M2 ancestor. So they, their ancestors, were once part of the same population in Eastern Africa.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
Full of crap as usual. Just a big heap of crap.
quote: Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: So Ramses III and modern West Africans share both the common E-V38 and E-M2 ancestor. So they, their ancestors, were once part of the same population in Eastern Africa.
This is testament to the fact that you have no idea what the hell you're talking about. In your mind Hawass et all verified both of these SNPs, while in reality, the Y chromosome can be theoretically anything immediately prior and in between E-V38 and E-M2, including lineages we don't know about. The most logical conclusion is that Ramses III was E-M2, given the exclusive presence of this branch of e1b1a in Egypt, but your dumbass confuses this plausibility for your politically motivated wet dream that Ramses III was factually E-M2 and that this was proven, hence your retarded and misplaced outrage tantrums when someone tells you otherwise and shoves your face in the facts. This is when you typically come with idiotic outbursts like "you just don't like the DNA results".
The truth is that you're just making it up as you go along, and you're too unlettered to even realize how your blatant ignorance is bursting through the cracks of your posts. You have no business even discussing this with your sub-par understanding of population genetics. Go post pictures, or make retarded posts like this where you randomly post old self-evident truths as if they're earth shattering revelations.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
What Swenet is probably trying to say(not speaking for him) is that any theory can be disproven with more testing.
What we know is that M2 is linked with E1b1a. That is all. West Africa may of had links with Egypt yet its not clear. Hopefully with time and other diverse avenues, this idea can be explored because euros won't explore it because some "claim" to be egyptians, or egyptians as "whites" so anything that links egypt to Africa is ignored or stated, but not investigated further. Diops and Obengas are needed who KNOW this field like Kieta, but not afraid to lose funding or Euro praise.
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ok, so you added something after I replied to you above. Maybe you don't realize it but you're contradicting yourself.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: The most logical conclusion is that Ramses III was E-M2,
quote: but your dumbass confuses this plausibility for your politically motivated wet dream that Ramses III was factually E-M2
So which is it? The most logical conclusion or wet dream?
So do you want me to talk about the more logical conclusion or another conclusion out of your ass?
We all know about the study, the Whit Athey's Haplogroup predictor assigned E1b1a as the Ramses III haplogroup. Not some other haplogroups.
If this is true then Ramses III and West Africans do share a common ancestor. As do all V38 and M2 carriers. Are you bothered by that?
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: I and others know what you've written in the past. For instance, you once listed Sweden as your place of origin, then you said you were West African then you said you were African American.
I't funny that Sweden rumor how many of you chumps bought it out of wishful thinking alone All someone needs to say is "I once looked up her profile and it had Sweden listed" and people believe it. And the ignorance to even point to it as it proves something. Let's pick out a place, the land of the tall blonds and make up a lie she lives there - as if there are no black people in Sweden. It's meaningless. A European black person would never attempt to do that
I advocate black people who were born in America when asked say they "African". They aren't required to spell it out "African American" . Chinese American people will say they are Chinese probably more often than "Chinese American" . But again it is another lie. Somebody says they remembered a time when I called myself simply "African". I never even did that. Produce the evidence or get out of my office, you've got nothing on me kid All somebody needs to do is say that and you sucka ass chumps believe it because you want to. "I rememeber" = no post = LIE
Stop Trolling Amun Ra's thread You kicked him off the facebook group, so why are you continuing to buzz like a mosquito ?
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
You posted the trombetta 2011 paper yourself recently, stupid. Where does it say that E-M2 equates E-V38, you big pseudo-scientific dummy?
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: [QB] Ok, so you added something after I replied to you above. Maybe you don't realize it but you're contradicting yourself.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: The most logical conclusion is that Ramses III was E-M2,
quote: but your dumbass confuses this plausibility for your politically motivated wet dream that Ramses III was factually E-M2
So which is it? The most logical conclusion or wet dream?
So do you want me to talk about the more logical conclusion or another conclusion out of your ass?
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: You posted the trombetta 2011 paper yourself yesterday, stupid. Where does it say that E-M2 equates E-V38, you big pseudo-scientific dummy?
We can clearly see on the graph that all E-M2 carriers are also E-V38 carriers. So if Ramses III carry either one of those haplogroups then him and West Africans do share a common ancestor (in Eastern Africa). As do all E-M2 and E-V38 carriers between each others.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dumbass, where does it say that E-M2 is synonymous with E-V38?
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Dumbass, where does it say that E-M2 is synonymous with E-V38.
Will you really start every one of your posts with an insult? It's getting ridiculous. How old are you? I think people get it, you don't' like me or my posts.
I don't think E-M2 and E-V38 are synonymous. It just that all E-M2 carriers are also carriers of E-V38. How many times do I need to repeat that before it gets into your thick head.
So if Ramses III is a E-V38 carrier (of whatever type), it means he shares a common ancestors with E-V38 carriers in West Africa. All E-M2 carriers in West Africa and elsewhere are also E-V38 carriers. We can clearly see it on the graph you posted. Since E-V38 is ancestral to E-M2.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
What Swenet is probably trying to say(not speaking for him) is that any theory can be disproven with more testing.
If you go back into the long DNATribes thread you find that Swenet can't really point to anything of value that the report is saying. If you make any claim as to the report's relevance Swenet shoots down each claim. By the end of it he has it so fuzzy and abstract as to be virtually useless. His smoke and mirrors, slick moves are the marks of an undercover Euronut.
Also his insult style as Amun Ra says is infantile. He's can't find Explorer to do the dozens with, left his dying facebook page in search of a scrap
lions productions 2014-till the casket drop
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: I don't think E-M2 and E-V38 are synonymous. It just that all E-M2 carriers are also carriers of E-V38. How many time do I need to repeat that before it gets into your thick head.
Of course you do. From the horse's mouth:
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: There's not a lot of results about Ancient Egyptian mummies dna analysis, but Ramses III being E1b1a/M2 makes him related to the majority of African people, which are E1b1a/M2 carriers, so they share a common ancestor (after the main OOA migration).
quote:Originally posted by KING: Not much on Genetics but I LOVE PICS.
Moving on.
What Swenet is probably trying to say(not speaking for him) is that any theory can be disproven with more testing.
What we know is that M2 is linked with E1b1a. That is all. West Africa may of had links with Egypt yet its not clear. Hopefully with time and other diverse avenues, this idea can be explored because euros won't explore it because some "claim" to be egyptians, or egyptians as "whites" so anything that links egypt to Africa is ignored or stated, but not investigated further. Diops and Obengas are needed who KNOW this field like Kieta, but not afraid to lose funding or Euro praise.
Its certain that Ancient Egypt had links with West Africa via L1b1a, L2a1, sicklemia of the Benin variety and a West African branch of tuberculosis which was found in some mummies. Much of Egypt's E-M2 and R-V88 seems to have a West African provenance as well. However, its plainly false to say that all E-V38 is automatically E-M2. Its also plainly false to say that all E-M2 is necessarily West African. I'm supposed to not point that out, why? I'm not motivated by dogma unlike some of the loons here.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by KING: Not much on Genetics but I LOVE PICS.
Moving on.
What Swenet is probably trying to say(not speaking for him) is that any theory can be disproven with more testing.
What we know is that M2 is linked with E1b1a. That is all. West Africa may of had links with Egypt yet its not clear. Hopefully with time and other diverse avenues, this idea can be explored because euros won't explore it because some "claim" to be egyptians, or egyptians as "whites" so anything that links egypt to Africa is ignored or stated, but not investigated further. Diops and Obengas are needed who KNOW this field like Kieta, but not afraid to lose funding or Euro praise.
Its certain that Ancient Egypt had links with West Africa via L1b1a, L2a1a the Benin haplotype and a West African branch of tuberculosis which was found in some mummies. Much of Egypt's E-M2 and R-V88 seems to have a West African provenance as well. However, its plainly false to say that all E-V38 is automatically E-M2. Its also plainly false to say that all E-M2 is necessarily West African.
It's also true to say that all E-M2 carriers are also E-V38 carriers.
So if Ramses III possess any of the E-V38 haplogroups then he shares a common ancestor with West African E-V38 carriers (as well as other E-V38 carriers).
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lying dumbass. That's not what you initially said. Your whole fabricated case was that Ramses III was necessarily E-M2 because he was predicted E-V38:
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: ^^^ Ramses III + Unknown Man E = E1b1a (E-M2)
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: [QB] Ok, so you added something after I replied to you above. Maybe you don't realize it but you're contradicting yourself.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: The most logical conclusion is that Ramses III was E-M2,
quote: but your dumbass confuses this plausibility for your politically motivated wet dream that Ramses III was factually E-M2
So which is it? The most logical conclusion or wet dream?
So do you want me to talk about the more logical conclusion or another conclusion out of your ass?
And anyone who disagrees "doesn't like the results".
Again, just to be clear, I do think Ramses III's haplogroup is most likely E-M2. This is simply due to the present day breakdown of E-V38 in modern Egypt, which, to my awareness, is exclusively E-M2. However, that Ramses III was a carrier of this branch is simply my view. Nowhere do I say that this came out of the paper nor do I post images of E-M2's distribution to make it seem like E-V38 has no substructure like some of the dogmatists here to whom the AE being simply African is not enough; they have to bend the evidence out of shape to tie themselves or their ethnicity to AE history. Super pathetic.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
Yeah Swenet I forgot about sickelcell traits from west Africa. I also remember Diops language link with Wolof and Egyptian
I also seemed to remember that Egyptians Claimed that they originated from the mountain of the moon where Hapi dwells. Uganda and South Sudan, Rwanda, Burundi and etc.
If it is the words in there book of the dead then why all the fuss about west this and east that? African Links are evident.
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Lying dumbass. That's not what you initially said. Your whole fabricated case was that Ramses III was necessarily E-M2 because he was predicted E-V38:
Old nomenclature or not. My whole case or important point about that issue is that Ramses III and most West African share a common ancestor (somewhere in Eastern Africa). The E1b1a one. Which happens to be true. Now I think you agree with me. Glad we agree.
QED
Have a nice one Swenet.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
Trying to reduce it to nomenclature. No, its YOU. You cannot be trusted to correctly report on a paper's findings to save your life. Where does Hassan say that the Meroitic samples was predominantly A-M13? Where does the 2012 BMJ report say that Ramses III was e1b1a1? Do you just make these things up on a sunny day? I'm trying to figure out what's making you lie so much and then turn around and accuse other people of "not liking the results" or being unable to "take the heat".
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
Yeah Swenet I forgot about sickelcell traits from west Africa. I also remember Diops language link with Wolof and Egyptian
I also seemed to remember that Egyptians Claimed that they originated from the mountain of the moon where Hapi dwells. Uganda and South Sudan, Rwanda, Burundi and etc.
If it is the words in there book of the dead then why all the fuss about west this and east that? African Links are evident.
I agree with that. As I said in the other thread, most East and West Africans are united under the E-P2 haplogroups. So at one time, they lived at the same location and had the same "parent", the E-P2 carrier. The location is East Africa since E-P2 is said to have originated in East Africa (Trombetta study).
So most Niger-Congo, Cushite and Chadic speakers carry the E-P2 haplogroup (the P2 mutation) and share a common origin in Eastern Africa.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic