A personal genomics company
in Switzerland says they've reconstructed a DNA profile of King Tutankhamen by watching the Discovery Channel, claiming the results suggest more than half of Western European men are related to the boy king. But researchers who worked to decode Tut's genome in the first place say the claim is "unscientific."
in Switzerland says they've reconstructed a DNA profile of King Tutankhamen by watching the Discovery Channel, claiming the results suggest more than half of Western European men are related to the boy king. But researchers who worked to decode Tut's genome in the first place say the claim is "unscientific."
Swiss genomics company iGENEA has launched a Tutankhamen DNA project based on what they say are genetic markers that appeared on acomputer screen during a Discovery Channel special on the famous pharaoh's genetic lineage.
during a Discovery Channel special on the famous pharaoh's genetic lineage.
"Maybe they didn't know what they showed, but we got 16 markers from the Y chromosome from these pharaohs," Roman Scholz, themanaging director of iGENEA, told LiveScience.
director of iGENEA, told LiveScience.
If the claims were true, it would put King Tut in a genetic profile group shared by more than half of Western European men. That would make those men relatives — albeit distant ones — of the pharaoh.
But Carsten Pusch, a geneticist at Germany's University of Tubingen who was part of the team that unraveled Tut's DNA from samples taken from his mummy and mummies of his family members, said that iGENEA's claims are "simply impossible." Pusch and his colleagues published part of their results, though not the Y-chromosome DNA, in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) in 2010. The Y chromosome is the sex chromosome found only in males, and looking at the genes in this chromosome would show Tut's male lineage.
Pusch's team used snippets of Y-chromosome DNA to link Tut to his closest relatives, identifying his mom and dad. But they didn't publish the full genetic data that would allow genomics companies like iGENEA to link modern people to the Tutankhamen lineage. According to Scholz, that crucial data is what appeared on the Discovery Channel.
that would allow genomics companies like iGENEA to link modern people to the Tutankhamen lineage. According to Scholz, that crucial data is what appeared on the Discovery Channel.
"Dr. Albert Zink from the EURAC [European Academy of Bolzano, an independent research center] in Bolzano and co-author of the 2010 JAMA publication screened the footage and confirmed that the company acts very unscientific," Pusch wrote in an email to LiveScience. "The Swiss company did not try to get into contact with us prior to launching their new Internet page."
The alleged Discovery Channel markers put Tut in a genetic profile group, or haplogroup, that also includes more than half of the men in Western Europe. Scholz said the company is now searching for the closest living relatives of Tutankhamen, men who share all 16 genetic markers on the pharaoh's supposed Y chromosome. Exact matches get a refund for their $179 to $399 test and will also get free additional DNA analysis.
The haplogroup R1b1a2, which iGENEA claims includes King Tut, arose 9,500 years ago in the Black Sea region. How Tut's ancestors would have gotten from that region to Egypt is unknown, but Scholz said iGENEA hopes to learn more by collecting more close and exact matches from modern people of Western European descent.
by collecting more close and exact matches from modern people of Western European descent.
Ancient Egyptian statue with Negro features
"The better the match, the more recent the common ancestor," Scholz said.
But people hoping to prove that they've got an ancestor in common with the notoriously sickly boy king should take iGENEA's claims with a grain of salt, Pusch said: "It appears that they try to better sell their DNA testing kit by using the media attention connected to King Tut."
Take a look at this that was found in Ramses Tomb. A classification of races in Ancient Egypt after foreign invasions. There are 2 particalar groups with Dark skin complexion. 1) The really Black ones that are Nubians. 2) The brown dark skin ones that are The Ancient Egyptians. The rest of them are Semites, Asiatics, etc. Us Whites would be put in those categories. Because, if those atual Brown Dark skinned Ancient Egyptians are really White, why do they look different from the others?? 
Lets start with Hesoid in 850-800 B.C.E.
" To the lands of the messagetae and of the proud half dog men, of the underground folk and of the feeble pygmies; and to the tribes of boundless BLACK-SKINS and the Libyans" -Hesoid,Catalouges of Women(850-800-B.C.E.) Boundless Black skins referring to (Egyptians-Ethiopians) Its clear that Hesoid distinguished the Libyans from boundless skin tribes and it is also evident that he was referring to the Egyptians and Ethiopians as boundless BLACK skin tribes of Africa. But, Hesoid also says the Libyans were Dark skin and NOT like White Europeans. "From Cronos sprang the Dark Libyans and the high souled Ethiopians" -Hesoid,Catalouges(850-800B.C.E.)
HESOID MADE IT CLEAR THAT DARK WAS DIFFERENT FROM BLACK AND CALLED THE ETHIOPIANS AND EGYPTIANS BOUNDLESSLY BLACK AND LIBYANS DARK SKIN. PROVING THAT BLACK MEANS BLACK, NOT DARK OR TANNED.
Next is Herodotus in 450 B.C.E.
"There can no doubt that the Colchians are an Egyptian race...The Egyptians say they believe the Colchians to be descended from the army of Sesostris, my own conjectures were found first on the fact that they are BLACK skin and have WOOLY hair. -Herodotus, 450 B.C.E. (The Histories,Book 2). MANY PEOPLE SAY THAT DARK SKIN AND CURLY WAS WHAT Herodotus SAID BUT THEY ARE WRONG, BECAUSE BLACK SKIN AND WOOLLY HAIR WAS FROM THE ORIGINAL RAWLINSON TRANSLATION AND LATER CHANGED BY PSEUDO SCHOLARS AT OXFORD. "Other translations of (Herodotus) have been made since but none has seriously rivaled the classical Rawlinson text"...- The Histories of Herodotus , VOL 1 by Manuel Komroff (1936) Even Rawlinson himself admitted that Herodotus called the Ancient Egyptians Black but Rawlinson said that Herodotus was exaggerating.
"The Egyptians appear to have been among the darkest races with which the Greeks of the early times came into direct contact. Herodotus calls them Blacks but this is an extreme exaggeration"...-History of Ancient Egypt Vol 1, by George Rawlinson (1881). Who are you going to believe Herodotus who was there 2450+ years ago or George Rawlinson who only live 100+ years ago.
Next is Aeschylus in 500 B.C.E.
(DESCRIBING THE EGYPTIANS)
"I can see the crew, with their Black limbs and white tunics"... -Aeschylus 500 B.C.E.
Next is Aristotle in 350 B.C.E.
"Those who are too BLACK, are cowards like for instance the Egyptians in the Ethiopians"... -Aristotle 350 B.C.E. (Physiognomies). It seems to me that Aristotle ,felt the need to disrespect the Ancient Egyptians and Ethiopians by calling them cowards because of they're BLACK SKIN, but it is fact, that the Ancient Egyptians and Ethiopians were never cowards but they were indeed BLACK. " THE EGYPTIANS AND THE ETHIOPIANS ARE TOO BLACK"... -Aristotle, 350 B.C.E. (Physiognomies).
Next is Apollodorus 180-120 B.C.E.
"Aegyptos conquered the country of the BLACK FOOTED ones and named it EGYPT"... -Apollodorus, Family of Inachus (Book 11, 180-120 B.C.E.). Proving the country of the BLACK FOOTED ones was called Kemet (Khamit) before it was Egypt. Many people like to believe thay Kemet meaned "the Black Land", because of it's soil. But, the quote above tells otherwise.
Next is Didorous Siculus 90-30 B.C.E.
"They say also that the Egyptians are colonist sent out by the Ethiopians, Osiris having been the leader of the colony"... -Didorous Siculus 90-30 B.C.E. (Book 3).
"The larger part of the customs of the Egyptians, are they hold, Ethiopian, the colonist still preserving their Ancient manners"... -Didorous Siculus 90-30 B.C.E. (Book 3).
Didorous Siculus also states that before foreign rule, all Egyptian Kings were Natives and the land was the most prosperous of the whole inhabited world (Book 1, para 44, 69). Proving that they were Natives, NOT foreign invaders.
"The Ethiopians as historians relate, were the FIRST of all men"... -Didorous Siculus 90-30 B.C.E. (Book 3, para 2).
"The proofs of this statement, they say are manifest, for that they did come into their land as immigrants from abroad but were NATIVES"... -Didorous Siculus 90-30 B.C.E. (Book 3, para 2).
This also proves that both Egyptians and Ethiopians were both Natives of Africa and early Egyptians were offspring from the 1st Ethiopians, just as the BIBLE proves that Cush (Ethiopia) was the big brother of Mizraim (Egypt).
Next is Ammianus Marcellinus, 325-330 A.D. (before the Arab & Turk invasions)
"The men of Egypt are mostly BLACK or BROWN with a skinny dessicated look"... -Ammianus Marcellinus, 325-330 A.D. (Book 22)
There you have it, Ammianus Marcellinus describing the men of Egypt before the Arabs as mostly BLACK and BROWN and proving that BLACK MEANS BLACK.
So, in conclusion, if the Ancient Egyptians were really White, were our Greek Historian ancestors lying???
" To the lands of the messagetae and of the proud half dog men, of the underground folk and of the feeble pygmies; and to the tribes of boundless BLACK-SKINS and the Libyans" -Hesoid,Catalouges of Women(850-800-B.C.E.) Boundless Black skins referring to (Egyptians-Ethiopians) Its clear that Hesoid distinguished the Libyans from boundless skin tribes and it is also evident that he was referring to the Egyptians and Ethiopians as boundless BLACK skin tribes of Africa. But, Hesoid also says the Libyans were Dark skin and NOT like White Europeans. "From Cronos sprang the Dark Libyans and the high souled Ethiopians" -Hesoid,Catalouges(850-800B.C.E.)
HESOID MADE IT CLEAR THAT DARK WAS DIFFERENT FROM BLACK AND CALLED THE ETHIOPIANS AND EGYPTIANS BOUNDLESSLY BLACK AND LIBYANS DARK SKIN. PROVING THAT BLACK MEANS BLACK, NOT DARK OR TANNED.
Next is Herodotus in 450 B.C.E.
"There can no doubt that the Colchians are an Egyptian race...The Egyptians say they believe the Colchians to be descended from the army of Sesostris, my own conjectures were found first on the fact that they are BLACK skin and have WOOLY hair. -Herodotus, 450 B.C.E. (The Histories,Book 2). MANY PEOPLE SAY THAT DARK SKIN AND CURLY WAS WHAT Herodotus SAID BUT THEY ARE WRONG, BECAUSE BLACK SKIN AND WOOLLY HAIR WAS FROM THE ORIGINAL RAWLINSON TRANSLATION AND LATER CHANGED BY PSEUDO SCHOLARS AT OXFORD. "Other translations of (Herodotus) have been made since but none has seriously rivaled the classical Rawlinson text"...- The Histories of Herodotus , VOL 1 by Manuel Komroff (1936) Even Rawlinson himself admitted that Herodotus called the Ancient Egyptians Black but Rawlinson said that Herodotus was exaggerating.
"The Egyptians appear to have been among the darkest races with which the Greeks of the early times came into direct contact. Herodotus calls them Blacks but this is an extreme exaggeration"...-History of Ancient Egypt Vol 1, by George Rawlinson (1881). Who are you going to believe Herodotus who was there 2450+ years ago or George Rawlinson who only live 100+ years ago.
Next is Aeschylus in 500 B.C.E.
(DESCRIBING THE EGYPTIANS)
"I can see the crew, with their Black limbs and white tunics"... -Aeschylus 500 B.C.E.
Next is Aristotle in 350 B.C.E.
"Those who are too BLACK, are cowards like for instance the Egyptians in the Ethiopians"... -Aristotle 350 B.C.E. (Physiognomies). It seems to me that Aristotle ,felt the need to disrespect the Ancient Egyptians and Ethiopians by calling them cowards because of they're BLACK SKIN, but it is fact, that the Ancient Egyptians and Ethiopians were never cowards but they were indeed BLACK. " THE EGYPTIANS AND THE ETHIOPIANS ARE TOO BLACK"... -Aristotle, 350 B.C.E. (Physiognomies).
Next is Apollodorus 180-120 B.C.E.
"Aegyptos conquered the country of the BLACK FOOTED ones and named it EGYPT"... -Apollodorus, Family of Inachus (Book 11, 180-120 B.C.E.). Proving the country of the BLACK FOOTED ones was called Kemet (Khamit) before it was Egypt. Many people like to believe thay Kemet meaned "the Black Land", because of it's soil. But, the quote above tells otherwise.
Next is Didorous Siculus 90-30 B.C.E.
"They say also that the Egyptians are colonist sent out by the Ethiopians, Osiris having been the leader of the colony"... -Didorous Siculus 90-30 B.C.E. (Book 3).
"The larger part of the customs of the Egyptians, are they hold, Ethiopian, the colonist still preserving their Ancient manners"... -Didorous Siculus 90-30 B.C.E. (Book 3).
Didorous Siculus also states that before foreign rule, all Egyptian Kings were Natives and the land was the most prosperous of the whole inhabited world (Book 1, para 44, 69). Proving that they were Natives, NOT foreign invaders.
"The Ethiopians as historians relate, were the FIRST of all men"... -Didorous Siculus 90-30 B.C.E. (Book 3, para 2).
"The proofs of this statement, they say are manifest, for that they did come into their land as immigrants from abroad but were NATIVES"... -Didorous Siculus 90-30 B.C.E. (Book 3, para 2).
This also proves that both Egyptians and Ethiopians were both Natives of Africa and early Egyptians were offspring from the 1st Ethiopians, just as the BIBLE proves that Cush (Ethiopia) was the big brother of Mizraim (Egypt).
Next is Ammianus Marcellinus, 325-330 A.D. (before the Arab & Turk invasions)
"The men of Egypt are mostly BLACK or BROWN with a skinny dessicated look"... -Ammianus Marcellinus, 325-330 A.D. (Book 22)
There you have it, Ammianus Marcellinus describing the men of Egypt before the Arabs as mostly BLACK and BROWN and proving that BLACK MEANS BLACK.
So, in conclusion, if the Ancient Egyptians were really White, were our Greek Historian ancestors lying???
Because they aren't. It is because the translations are being altered in favor of negro appeasement.
Herodotus did not use the word Ethiopians, which meant "burnt face", to describe those living along the Nile (Egyptians), but Negroes don't care about that. Some Afrocentric nut makes the claim the Herodotus said they were black, and lo they suddenly are, even though he didn't. His other reference to curly hair is always over looked by Negroes seeking to feed their feel good logic conclusions. In Histories 7.70.1 Herodotus writes that Ethiopians as having the "woolliest hair of all men". He didn't use the term Egyptians, but "burn face" word of Ethiopian instead.
There is even more evidence as to the lack of understand about Herodotus and Egypt when he mentions the Colchians as another group having "dark skin and woolly hair." The Colchians inhabited Georgia in the Caucasus. While the Afrocentric nutjobs struggle to prove they have tangible claim on being other than history's farm equipment, by saying the Colchians were also negro, Hippocrates comes along writes the Colchians in Phasis "are large and corpulent in body. Neither joint nor vein is evident. They have a yellow flesh, as if victims of jaundice" (Hippocrates, Airs, Waters, Places). But Negroes don't want to hear that. That run counter to the dream of being god-kings who levitated the stone blocks of the pyramids with their vast mental powers. Ah, the dreams of children.
The problem is one of wish fulfillment, and we all know the negro brain reaches conclusions based on how good something feels rather than on facts. The Greek words melas and leukos are equivalent to "swarthy" and "fair" rather than the modern day, post hippie snivel rights movement, terms of "black" or "white". Most ancient historians used melas or melanchroes to describe Egyptians, which translates as "dark-complected" rather than literally black as today's Afrocentric morons would like you to believe.
This mistranslation is most apparent when compared to other works, notably those of Homer, Manilius, Arrian, Strabo.
There is even more evidence as to the lack of understand about Herodotus and Egypt when he mentions the Colchians as another group having "dark skin and woolly hair." The Colchians inhabited Georgia in the Caucasus. While the Afrocentric nutjobs struggle to prove they have tangible claim on being other than history's farm equipment, by saying the Colchians were also negro, Hippocrates comes along writes the Colchians in Phasis "are large and corpulent in body. Neither joint nor vein is evident. They have a yellow flesh, as if victims of jaundice" (Hippocrates, Airs, Waters, Places). But Negroes don't want to hear that. That run counter to the dream of being god-kings who levitated the stone blocks of the pyramids with their vast mental powers. Ah, the dreams of children.
The problem is one of wish fulfillment, and we all know the negro brain reaches conclusions based on how good something feels rather than on facts. The Greek words melas and leukos are equivalent to "swarthy" and "fair" rather than the modern day, post hippie snivel rights movement, terms of "black" or "white". Most ancient historians used melas or melanchroes to describe Egyptians, which translates as "dark-complected" rather than literally black as today's Afrocentric morons would like you to believe.
This mistranslation is most apparent when compared to other works, notably those of Homer, Manilius, Arrian, Strabo.
The historical evidence is very clear, DNA is very clear, Linguistic studies are very clear, cultural anthropology studies are very clear, and even cultural anthropology is very clear on the races of Egypt.
You look quite the fool for posting this same thing over and over with a different name each time, arrogantly thinking we are stupid.
Egypt was founded and ruled by bands of Chadic, Berber and Semitic hunter-gathers moving south along the Mediterranean basin, not Negroes moving north out of Africa. But, after Thutmose III conquered Nubia, interbreeding with Kush (Nubia) slaves occurred and Egypt began is long slow descent into ruin.
After Egypt conquered Nubia, Thutmose them in to slaves, which in turn married into the native population.
That's right. Your ancestors were slaves long before Anthony Johnson enslaved John Casor set foot in America.
Over time, the descendants of slaves both could not manage the complexities of civilization, as well as expressed no desire to perpetuate the culture of their former masters. Egypt's ruling elite did not reproduced as fast as its former slave population. A once prosperous land, Egypt became filled a people who could not comprehend, nor maintain the civilization the inherited via their ancestors miscegenation with Nubian slaves.
We see the very same thing being replicated today in America. Detroit has already fallen to the negro scourge.
By the end of the pharaohic era, Negro blooded Egyptians dominated the area and were ruled by a pale skin Greeks. With Cleo's death, there was no native Egyptian rulership. She was the last Pharaoh, the last of brother-sister pairings from Alexander's General Ptolemy (that bit is very important to know, as it tells you what she looked like). Egypt became a 3rd world province of Rome, only suitable for growing grain for Empire's plebs.
So why the "contradictions" you spoke of? Well, JUST LIKE THE LAST TIME you posted this, Negroes desperately cling to a Black Egypt, despite all the evidence to the contrary, because they need something show they matter . . .that they did something other than subsistence existing. Valid facts are being ignored in favor of ethnic appeasement. No amount of proof, DNA, archaeology, anthropology, linguists, physiology, will change their mind. Only fueling the belief that Negroes are creatures whose entire existence is one driven by a lack of gratification deterrence AND lacking high levels of frontal cortex development. It simply feels better to think of yourself as descended from the builders of the pyramids than as the perpetual slaves and mud-runting savages.
Afro studies lemmings, are given this pablum of feel good history instead of a real education, who are allowed to make stuff up out of white guilt rather than learn real history. Fear of lawsuits charging racism allows these affirmative action babies to become professors themselves, with nobody willing to face them down and say the truth, so the cycle continues.
With each iteration of these affirmative action Afrocentric simpletons, each claiming Negroes are the progenitors of every thing, every civilization, every invention, every discovery, every world leader throughout all of history, the truth become less and less palatable. They will fabricate mythical events to further inflate their own historical significance (flying moon in stone space ships) as well as delusions to explain their own fallacies (whites conspired to hold us back/ whites were created in a lab to enslave Negros).
What negro Egypt adherents can not explain is the proto-U6 issue, ABO blood types differences between Ancient Egypt and Europeans, similarities in Egyptian & African skulls shapes, Predynastic sample DNA samples from Upper Egypt being very close to West Eurasians, Dental patterns showing Egyptians closer to modern day Arabs, than to ancient and even modern day Nubians, and Egyptian mummies having hair with a roundish cross-section just like modern Eurasians and Arabs.
How about Swiss scientists at Zurich-based DNA genealogy centre, iGENEA, reconstructed DNA profile of Tutankhamun, based on a film that was made for the Discovery Channel, which showed that Tutankhamun has Haplogroup R1b1a2, to which more than 50% of European men and less than 1% of modern-day Egyptians belong to. However, this DNA group also shows up in parts of northern Africa, particularly some regions in Algeria, where tests have found it in 11.8% of subjects. The R1b haplogroup is also found in central Africa around Chad and Cameroon, but the Chadic-speaking area in Africa is dominated by the branch known as R1b1c (R-V88).
They also need to explain a craniofacial study by C. Loring Brace concluded that: "The Predynastic of Upper Egypt and the Late Dynastic of Lower Egypt are more closely related to each other than to any other population. As a whole, they show ties with the European Neolithic, North Africa, modern Europe, and, more remotely, India, but not at all with sub-Saharan Africa, eastern Asia, Oceania, or the New World. Adjacent people in the Nile valley show similarities in trivial traits in an unbroken series from the delta in the north southward through Nubia and all the way to Somalia at the equator. At the same time, the gradient in skin color and body proportions suggests long-term adaptive response to selective forces appropriate to the latitude where they occur.
Then there is also a 2006 bioarchaeological study on the dental morphology of ancient Egyptians by Prof. Joel Irish shows dental traits characteristic of current indigenous North Africans and to a lesser extent Middle Eastern and southern European populations, but not at all to Sub-Saharan populations.
Facts, those nasty things that keep getting in the way of Afrocentric propaganda. Detailed journals of men who lived during that time, statutes, genetic studies, all of it show no indication that Nubians ruled Egypt. THE ONLY case for ancient Egypt being ruled by blacks comes from the mind of a simpleton - blacks come from Africa, Egypt is in Africa, ergo, Egypt was black.
Nor was Egypt the springboard for civilization as the Negro adherents would like you to belive. This statement alone shows a shortsightedness and ignorance of history beyond all reason, and continues to point to a larger issue. Blacks are so utterly desperate to claim something of historical note, they are willing to steal the accomplishments of others. It continues to perpetuate the stereotype of thieving, angry, violent, little children.
What irks me so, how this lie . . .this theft of history, spreads like a cancer among the those unwilling to make even the most cursory glance into the past. It plays on the fears of ignorant and feeds the wanting.
You look quite the fool for posting this same thing over and over with a different name each time, arrogantly thinking we are stupid.
Egypt was founded and ruled by bands of Chadic, Berber and Semitic hunter-gathers moving south along the Mediterranean basin, not Negroes moving north out of Africa. But, after Thutmose III conquered Nubia, interbreeding with Kush (Nubia) slaves occurred and Egypt began is long slow descent into ruin.
After Egypt conquered Nubia, Thutmose them in to slaves, which in turn married into the native population.
That's right. Your ancestors were slaves long before Anthony Johnson enslaved John Casor set foot in America.
Over time, the descendants of slaves both could not manage the complexities of civilization, as well as expressed no desire to perpetuate the culture of their former masters. Egypt's ruling elite did not reproduced as fast as its former slave population. A once prosperous land, Egypt became filled a people who could not comprehend, nor maintain the civilization the inherited via their ancestors miscegenation with Nubian slaves.
We see the very same thing being replicated today in America. Detroit has already fallen to the negro scourge.
By the end of the pharaohic era, Negro blooded Egyptians dominated the area and were ruled by a pale skin Greeks. With Cleo's death, there was no native Egyptian rulership. She was the last Pharaoh, the last of brother-sister pairings from Alexander's General Ptolemy (that bit is very important to know, as it tells you what she looked like). Egypt became a 3rd world province of Rome, only suitable for growing grain for Empire's plebs.
So why the "contradictions" you spoke of? Well, JUST LIKE THE LAST TIME you posted this, Negroes desperately cling to a Black Egypt, despite all the evidence to the contrary, because they need something show they matter . . .that they did something other than subsistence existing. Valid facts are being ignored in favor of ethnic appeasement. No amount of proof, DNA, archaeology, anthropology, linguists, physiology, will change their mind. Only fueling the belief that Negroes are creatures whose entire existence is one driven by a lack of gratification deterrence AND lacking high levels of frontal cortex development. It simply feels better to think of yourself as descended from the builders of the pyramids than as the perpetual slaves and mud-runting savages.
Afro studies lemmings, are given this pablum of feel good history instead of a real education, who are allowed to make stuff up out of white guilt rather than learn real history. Fear of lawsuits charging racism allows these affirmative action babies to become professors themselves, with nobody willing to face them down and say the truth, so the cycle continues.
With each iteration of these affirmative action Afrocentric simpletons, each claiming Negroes are the progenitors of every thing, every civilization, every invention, every discovery, every world leader throughout all of history, the truth become less and less palatable. They will fabricate mythical events to further inflate their own historical significance (flying moon in stone space ships) as well as delusions to explain their own fallacies (whites conspired to hold us back/ whites were created in a lab to enslave Negros).
What negro Egypt adherents can not explain is the proto-U6 issue, ABO blood types differences between Ancient Egypt and Europeans, similarities in Egyptian & African skulls shapes, Predynastic sample DNA samples from Upper Egypt being very close to West Eurasians, Dental patterns showing Egyptians closer to modern day Arabs, than to ancient and even modern day Nubians, and Egyptian mummies having hair with a roundish cross-section just like modern Eurasians and Arabs.
How about Swiss scientists at Zurich-based DNA genealogy centre, iGENEA, reconstructed DNA profile of Tutankhamun, based on a film that was made for the Discovery Channel, which showed that Tutankhamun has Haplogroup R1b1a2, to which more than 50% of European men and less than 1% of modern-day Egyptians belong to. However, this DNA group also shows up in parts of northern Africa, particularly some regions in Algeria, where tests have found it in 11.8% of subjects. The R1b haplogroup is also found in central Africa around Chad and Cameroon, but the Chadic-speaking area in Africa is dominated by the branch known as R1b1c (R-V88).
They also need to explain a craniofacial study by C. Loring Brace concluded that: "The Predynastic of Upper Egypt and the Late Dynastic of Lower Egypt are more closely related to each other than to any other population. As a whole, they show ties with the European Neolithic, North Africa, modern Europe, and, more remotely, India, but not at all with sub-Saharan Africa, eastern Asia, Oceania, or the New World. Adjacent people in the Nile valley show similarities in trivial traits in an unbroken series from the delta in the north southward through Nubia and all the way to Somalia at the equator. At the same time, the gradient in skin color and body proportions suggests long-term adaptive response to selective forces appropriate to the latitude where they occur.
Then there is also a 2006 bioarchaeological study on the dental morphology of ancient Egyptians by Prof. Joel Irish shows dental traits characteristic of current indigenous North Africans and to a lesser extent Middle Eastern and southern European populations, but not at all to Sub-Saharan populations.
Facts, those nasty things that keep getting in the way of Afrocentric propaganda. Detailed journals of men who lived during that time, statutes, genetic studies, all of it show no indication that Nubians ruled Egypt. THE ONLY case for ancient Egypt being ruled by blacks comes from the mind of a simpleton - blacks come from Africa, Egypt is in Africa, ergo, Egypt was black.
Nor was Egypt the springboard for civilization as the Negro adherents would like you to belive. This statement alone shows a shortsightedness and ignorance of history beyond all reason, and continues to point to a larger issue. Blacks are so utterly desperate to claim something of historical note, they are willing to steal the accomplishments of others. It continues to perpetuate the stereotype of thieving, angry, violent, little children.
What irks me so, how this lie . . .this theft of history, spreads like a cancer among the those unwilling to make even the most cursory glance into the past. It plays on the fears of ignorant and feeds the wanting.
Negroes cling to a Black Egypt, despite all the evidence to the contrary, because they need something show they matter . . .that they did something other than subsistence existing.
No amount of proof, DNA, archaeology, anthropology, linguists, physiology, will change their mind. Remember, you are dealing with a people who entire existence is one driven by a lack of gratification deterrence AND lacking high levels of frontal cortex development.
It simply feels better to think of yourself as descended from the builders of the pyramids than as the perpetual slaves and mud-runting savages.
Worse are the afro studies lemmings, who are given this pablum of feel good history instead of a real education, who are allowed to make stuff up out of white guilt rather than learn real history. Fear of lawsuits charging racism allows these affirmative action babies to become professors themselves, with nobody willing to face them down and say the truth, so the cycle continues.
Now we have several iterations of affirmative action Afrocentric simpletons, claiming Negroes are the progenitors of every thing, every civilization, every invention, every discovery, every world leader throughout all of history. They will fabricate mythical events to further inflate their own historical significance (we flew the moon in stone space ships) as well as delusions to explain their own fallacies (whites conspired to hold us back/ whites were created in a lab to enslave Negros).
Of course Egypt on the upswing was non-negro, for how could it be other. And once it became negro, it degenerated into the ruins we see to day. Just like any number of other former white and now negro places. Haiti, South Africa, Detroit, Atlanta, Memphis, Compton. Time and time again, we see history unfold . . .whites build, blacks consume.
It is quite obvious our current hurdy-gurdy monkey has failed to actually read anything about Egypt, only cut and past from his favorite blog (written by another analytically deficient hurdy-gurdy dancer) and does not understand the material.
What he can not explain nor accept is the proto-U6 issue, ABO blood types differences between Ancient Egypt and Europeans, similarities in Egyptian & African skulls shapes, Predynastic sample DNA samples from Upper Egypt being very close to West Eurasians, Dental patterns showing Egyptians closer to modern day Arabs, than to ancient and even modern day Nubians, and Egyptian mummies having hair with a roundish cross-section just like modern Eurasians and Arabs.
How about Swiss scientists at Zurich-based DNA genealogy centre, iGENEA, reconstructed DNA profile of Tutankhamun, based on a film that was made for the Discovery Channel, which showed that Tutankhamun has Haplogroup R1b1a2, to which more than 50% of European men and less than 1% of modern-day Egyptians belong to. However, this DNA group also shows up in parts of northern Africa, particularly some regions in Algeria, where tests have found it in 11.8% of subjects. The R1b haplogroup is also found in central Africa around Chad and Cameroon, but the Chadic-speaking area in Africa is dominated by the branch known as R1b1c (R-V88).
What does our current hurdy-gurdy dancer offer up? An artist's rendition from life magazine. Yes, that is proof.
How about you take a moment and explain the craniofacial study by C. Loring Brace that concluded: "The Predynastic of Upper Egypt and the Late Dynastic of Lower Egypt are more closely related to each other than to any other population. As a whole, they show ties with the European Neolithic, North Africa, modern Europe, and, more remotely, India, but not at all with sub-Saharan Africa, eastern Asia, Oceania, or the New World. Adjacent people in the Nile valley show similarities in trivial traits in an unbroken series from the delta in the north southward through Nubia and all the way to Somalia at the equator. At the same time, the gradient in skin color and body proportions suggests long-term adaptive response to selective forces appropriate to the latitude where they occur."
Then there is also a 2006 bioarchaeological study on the dental morphology of ancient Egyptians by Prof. Joel Irish shows dental traits characteristic of current indigenous North Africans and to a lesser extent Middle Eastern and southern European populations, but not at all to Sub-Saharan populations.
How strange is that?
The rebuttal? A pencil sketch of Piankhy The Great By E. harper Johnson. Hey, if I render out a unicorn with wings does that make it so?
Facts, those nasty things that keep getting in the way of Afrocentric propaganda. Detailed journals of men who lived during that time, statutes, genetic studies, all of it show no indication that Nubians ruled Egypt. THE ONLY case for ancient Egypt being ruled by blacks comes from the mind of a simpleton - blacks come from Africa, Egypt is in Africa, ergo, Egypt was black
You see, Unregblackone/Mace1, we actually know something about science . . .about history . . .about anthropology. We aren't like you, angry couch potatoes salivating over some bloggers claim of a negro Egypt like a Pavlovian dog for a meal.
Now be a real stupid moron and post the bit about Herodotus, so I dump on you about the correct translations of the words melas and leukos rather than the Jet Magazine's claim that you WANT to be true.
No amount of proof, DNA, archaeology, anthropology, linguists, physiology, will change their mind. Remember, you are dealing with a people who entire existence is one driven by a lack of gratification deterrence AND lacking high levels of frontal cortex development.
It simply feels better to think of yourself as descended from the builders of the pyramids than as the perpetual slaves and mud-runting savages.
Worse are the afro studies lemmings, who are given this pablum of feel good history instead of a real education, who are allowed to make stuff up out of white guilt rather than learn real history. Fear of lawsuits charging racism allows these affirmative action babies to become professors themselves, with nobody willing to face them down and say the truth, so the cycle continues.
Now we have several iterations of affirmative action Afrocentric simpletons, claiming Negroes are the progenitors of every thing, every civilization, every invention, every discovery, every world leader throughout all of history. They will fabricate mythical events to further inflate their own historical significance (we flew the moon in stone space ships) as well as delusions to explain their own fallacies (whites conspired to hold us back/ whites were created in a lab to enslave Negros).
Of course Egypt on the upswing was non-negro, for how could it be other. And once it became negro, it degenerated into the ruins we see to day. Just like any number of other former white and now negro places. Haiti, South Africa, Detroit, Atlanta, Memphis, Compton. Time and time again, we see history unfold . . .whites build, blacks consume.
It is quite obvious our current hurdy-gurdy monkey has failed to actually read anything about Egypt, only cut and past from his favorite blog (written by another analytically deficient hurdy-gurdy dancer) and does not understand the material.
What he can not explain nor accept is the proto-U6 issue, ABO blood types differences between Ancient Egypt and Europeans, similarities in Egyptian & African skulls shapes, Predynastic sample DNA samples from Upper Egypt being very close to West Eurasians, Dental patterns showing Egyptians closer to modern day Arabs, than to ancient and even modern day Nubians, and Egyptian mummies having hair with a roundish cross-section just like modern Eurasians and Arabs.
How about Swiss scientists at Zurich-based DNA genealogy centre, iGENEA, reconstructed DNA profile of Tutankhamun, based on a film that was made for the Discovery Channel, which showed that Tutankhamun has Haplogroup R1b1a2, to which more than 50% of European men and less than 1% of modern-day Egyptians belong to. However, this DNA group also shows up in parts of northern Africa, particularly some regions in Algeria, where tests have found it in 11.8% of subjects. The R1b haplogroup is also found in central Africa around Chad and Cameroon, but the Chadic-speaking area in Africa is dominated by the branch known as R1b1c (R-V88).
What does our current hurdy-gurdy dancer offer up? An artist's rendition from life magazine. Yes, that is proof.
How about you take a moment and explain the craniofacial study by C. Loring Brace that concluded: "The Predynastic of Upper Egypt and the Late Dynastic of Lower Egypt are more closely related to each other than to any other population. As a whole, they show ties with the European Neolithic, North Africa, modern Europe, and, more remotely, India, but not at all with sub-Saharan Africa, eastern Asia, Oceania, or the New World. Adjacent people in the Nile valley show similarities in trivial traits in an unbroken series from the delta in the north southward through Nubia and all the way to Somalia at the equator. At the same time, the gradient in skin color and body proportions suggests long-term adaptive response to selective forces appropriate to the latitude where they occur."
Then there is also a 2006 bioarchaeological study on the dental morphology of ancient Egyptians by Prof. Joel Irish shows dental traits characteristic of current indigenous North Africans and to a lesser extent Middle Eastern and southern European populations, but not at all to Sub-Saharan populations.
How strange is that?
The rebuttal? A pencil sketch of Piankhy The Great By E. harper Johnson. Hey, if I render out a unicorn with wings does that make it so?
Facts, those nasty things that keep getting in the way of Afrocentric propaganda. Detailed journals of men who lived during that time, statutes, genetic studies, all of it show no indication that Nubians ruled Egypt. THE ONLY case for ancient Egypt being ruled by blacks comes from the mind of a simpleton - blacks come from Africa, Egypt is in Africa, ergo, Egypt was black
You see, Unregblackone/Mace1, we actually know something about science . . .about history . . .about anthropology. We aren't like you, angry couch potatoes salivating over some bloggers claim of a negro Egypt like a Pavlovian dog for a meal.
Now be a real stupid moron and post the bit about Herodotus, so I dump on you about the correct translations of the words melas and leukos rather than the Jet Magazine's claim that you WANT to be true.
Microscopic inspection of the roots of Ramesses II's hair proved that the king's hair was originally red, which suggests that he came from a family of redheads.[66] This has more than just cosmetic significance: in ancient Egypt people with red hair were associated with the god Seth, the slayer of Osiris, and the name of Ramesses II's father, Seti I, means "follower of Seth."[67]
Ramses V looks more English than Negro. 
King Tut's skull:
Various skulls:
Heed how Tut's prognathism, foramen magnum, canine structure, and chin curve all sharply resemble the European skull in the non-definitive scan. A view of the skull's side itself (not a picture scan) would yield more accurate comparative results. The slaves are one thing, and their Egyptian masters another.
Akhenaten, Nefertiti, and Tutankhamun had this weird physical look.
Akhenaten was really feminine looking and had this enormous skull, alien like. Lam/Awtass who Aleister Crowley channeled looked like a gray alien and this being taught him Egyptian occultism. Why are the grays into Egyptian occultism?
Akhenaten was really feminine looking and had this enormous skull, alien like. Lam/Awtass who Aleister Crowley channeled looked like a gray alien and this being taught him Egyptian occultism. Why are the grays into Egyptian occultism?
This is Akhenaten:
Akhenetan was the only Pharoah into showing what they actually looked like. About all the pharoahs looked like that. Weird huge heads, femine features, and frail bodies.
The other Pharoahs depicted themselves as these macho men which was not how they really looked. Akhenetan only had a short reign where this happened.
The other Pharoahs depicted themselves as these macho men which was not how they really looked. Akhenetan only had a short reign where this happened.
No hay comentarios.:
Publicar un comentario