Caucasian peoples

[RWHeathenGamer]

You just contradicted yourself.

Yes their is a such thing as super saharan. Your lack of knowledge regarding this does not make it so.

So that proves my point.

You are just making up things up.

No it doesn't. It proves my point. The negroid admixture is primarily evident in the south, which historically bordered nubia, which fits the timeline with the absorption of Nubia by Egypt in the later dynastic periods perfectly. So you have a primarily Caucasian Northern Egypt, and an Egypt in the south that has negroid admixture from the nubian absorption, reflected in the later Pharaohs during the decline of Ancient Egypt.

You claimed earlier that Arabs and people from North Africa were not an admixture.

Arabs aren't negroid, they are Caucasian, some Egyptians in Southern Egypt have Arab and negroid admixture.

 

[Asclepias]

There is no such thing as super saharan. The E1B1 admixture correlates with the Nubian absorption so it proves my point. That would seem correct, probably around 36% have some negroid admixture. The rest, as that data shows, are primarily part of the J, G, T haplogroups which are Caucasian in origin.

So thank you for confirming my points.

You just contradicted yourself dummy. I said they were an admixture in the first place.

Yes there is a such thing as super saharan. Your lack of knowledge regarding this does not make it a false term.

Of course they have caucasian now. So that proves my point. Thats not what they had in ancient times. If they did why are no mummies showing this in their DNA?

There is no such thing as super saharan. It is a false term.

No it doesn't, it proves my point, if you read my original post, my scholarly backed hypothesis stated that there was a nubian absorption period in the late dynastic era, backed up by historical records. What I said and what is backed up by DNA evidence is that the Northern Egyptians, the natives who founded Ancient Egypt, are represented in the northern Egyptians of the country, genetically speaking. while the Nubians are represented in the south genetically speaking and comprised the ruling stock of the declining Ancient Egypt.

We analyzed Y-chromosome haplotypes in the Nile River Valley in Egypt in 274 unrelated males, using the p49a,f TaqI polymorphism. These individuals were born in three regions along the river: in Alexandria (the Delta and Lower Egypt), in Upper Egypt, and in Lower Nubia. Fifteen different p49a,f TaqI haplotypes are present in Egypt, the three most common being haplotype V (39.4%), haplotype XI (18.9%), and haplotype IV (13.9%). Haplotype V is a characteristic Arab haplotype, with a northern geographic distribution in Egypt in the Nile River Valley. Haplotype IV, characteristic of sub-Saharan populations, shows a southern geographic distribution in Egypt.

Brief communication: Y-chromosome haplotypes in Egypt - Lucotte - 2003 - American Journal of Physical Anthropology - Wiley Online Library

Like I said your lack of knowledge about the term super saharan is irrelevant.

You keep proving my point and you still havent addressed the lack of DNA evidence in ancient Egyptians to support your position. Where are the mummies that tested as Caucasians? Ramses II and Tut both were both tested as Black.

 

[RWHeathenGamer]

You just contradicted yourself.

Yes their is a such thing as super saharan. Your lack of knowledge regarding this does not make it so.

So that proves my point.

You are just making up things up.

No it doesn't. It proves my point. The negroid admixture is primarily evident in the south, which historically bordered nubia, which fits the timeline with the absorption of Nubia by Egypt in the later dynastic periods perfectly. So you have a primarily Caucasian Northern Egypt, and an Egypt in the south that has negroid admixture from the nubian absorption, reflected in the later Pharaohs during the decline of Ancient Egypt.

The very Egyptians you are arguing about saw the world exactly the opposite of Europeans. Their maps placed Africa in what you would call the northern hemisphere. Hence the term super saharan.

They were wrong, why do you go off debunked 3000 year old maps. And they never used the term super saharan.

 

[Asclepias]

You are just making up things up.

No it doesn't. It proves my point. The negroid admixture is primarily evident in the south, which historically bordered nubia, which fits the timeline with the absorption of Nubia by Egypt in the later dynastic periods perfectly. So you have a primarily Caucasian Northern Egypt, and an Egypt in the south that has negroid admixture from the nubian absorption, reflected in the later Pharaohs during the decline of Ancient Egypt.

You claimed earlier that Arabs and people from North Africa were not an admixture.

Arabs aren't negroid, they are Caucasian, some Egyptians in Southern Egypt have Arab and negroid admixture.

I didnt say Arabs were completely negroid. I said they were an admixture which you proved by posting the DNA results.

Here are some southern Egyptians. Are you claiming they have a little super saharan admixture?

 

[RWHeathenGamer]

You just contradicted yourself dummy. I said they were an admixture in the first place.

Yes there is a such thing as super saharan. Your lack of knowledge regarding this does not make it a false term.

Of course they have caucasian now. So that proves my point. Thats not what they had in ancient times. If they did why are no mummies showing this in their DNA?

There is no such thing as super saharan. It is a false term.

No it doesn't, it proves my point, if you read my original post, my scholarly backed hypothesis stated that there was a nubian absorption period in the late dynastic era, backed up by historical records. What I said and what is backed up by DNA evidence is that the Northern Egyptians, the natives who founded Ancient Egypt, are represented in the northern Egyptians of the country, genetically speaking. while the Nubians are represented in the south genetically speaking and comprised the ruling stock of the declining Ancient Egypt.

We analyzed Y-chromosome haplotypes in the Nile River Valley in Egypt in 274 unrelated males, using the p49a,f TaqI polymorphism. These individuals were born in three regions along the river: in Alexandria (the Delta and Lower Egypt), in Upper Egypt, and in Lower Nubia. Fifteen different p49a,f TaqI haplotypes are present in Egypt, the three most common being haplotype V (39.4%), haplotype XI (18.9%), and haplotype IV (13.9%). Haplotype V is a characteristic Arab haplotype, with a northern geographic distribution in Egypt in the Nile River Valley. Haplotype IV, characteristic of sub-Saharan populations, shows a southern geographic distribution in Egypt.

Brief communication: Y-chromosome haplotypes in Egypt - Lucotte - 2003 - American Journal of Physical Anthropology - Wiley Online Library

Like I said your lack of knowledge about the term super saharan is irrelevant.

You keep proving my point and you still havent addressed the lack of DNA evidence in ancient Egyptians to support your position. Where are the mummies that tested as Caucasians? Ramses II and Tut both were both tested as Black.

Super saharan is an irrelevant term.

I proved my own points and your point that Ramses II and Tut had Negroid admixture proves my point that there were Pharaohs we negroid admixture after the Nubian absoprtion which coincided with the decline of Ancient Egypt.

 

[Asclepias]

You are just making up things up.

No it doesn't. It proves my point. The negroid admixture is primarily evident in the south, which historically bordered nubia, which fits the timeline with the absorption of Nubia by Egypt in the later dynastic periods perfectly. So you have a primarily Caucasian Northern Egypt, and an Egypt in the south that has negroid admixture from the nubian absorption, reflected in the later Pharaohs during the decline of Ancient Egypt.

The very Egyptians you are arguing about saw the world exactly the opposite of Europeans. Their maps placed Africa in what you would call the northern hemisphere. Hence the term super saharan.

They were wrong, why do you go off debunked 3000 year old maps. And they never used the term super saharan.

How can you prove they were wrong? This will be interesting but lets not lose sight of the fact you have zero evidence for ancient Egyptians being Arab. I have allowed you the leeway to discuss this with me but at some point you are going to have to put up or shut up. Its your call.

 

[RWHeathenGamer]

You claimed earlier that Arabs and people from North Africa were not an admixture.

Arabs aren't negroid, they are Caucasian, some Egyptians in Southern Egypt have Arab and negroid admixture.

I didnt say Arabs were completely negroid. ]

Arabs aren't negroid at all they are caucasoid. Those aren't arabs that you posted those are negroids of the Northeast African variety.

 

[Asclepias]

There is no such thing as super saharan. It is a false term.

No it doesn't, it proves my point, if you read my original post, my scholarly backed hypothesis stated that there was a nubian absorption period in the late dynastic era, backed up by historical records. What I said and what is backed up by DNA evidence is that the Northern Egyptians, the natives who founded Ancient Egypt, are represented in the northern Egyptians of the country, genetically speaking. while the Nubians are represented in the south genetically speaking and comprised the ruling stock of the declining Ancient Egypt.


Brief communication: Y-chromosome haplotypes in Egypt - Lucotte - 2003 - American Journal of Physical Anthropology - Wiley Online Library

Like I said your lack of knowledge about the term super saharan is irrelevant.

You keep proving my point and you still havent addressed the lack of DNA evidence in ancient Egyptians to support your position. Where are the mummies that tested as Caucasians? Ramses II and Tut both were both tested as Black.

Super saharan is an irrelevant term.

I proved my own points and your point that Ramses II and Tut had Negroid admixture proves my point that there were Pharaohs we negroid admixture after the Nubian absoprtion which coincided with the decline of Ancient Egypt.

You havent proven anything except you are good at contradicting yourself. 96% super saharan is not what one would call an admixture.

 

[RWHeathenGamer]

The very Egyptians you are arguing about saw the world exactly the opposite of Europeans. Their maps placed Africa in what you would call the northern hemisphere. Hence the term super saharan.

They were wrong, why do you go off debunked 3000 year old maps. And they never used the term super saharan.

How can you prove they were wrong?

NASA photography.

And they never used the term super saharan.

 

[Asclepias]

Arabs aren't negroid, they are Caucasian, some Egyptians in Southern Egypt have Arab and negroid admixture.

I didnt say Arabs were completely negroid. ]

Arabs aren't negroid at all they are caucasoid. Those aren't arabs that you posted those are negroids of the Northeast African variety.

Arabs have super saharan admixture as your link proved for me.

I know those are not Arabs. They are Egyptians. Sorry you cant deal with that.

 

[RWHeathenGamer]

Like I said your lack of knowledge about the term super saharan is irrelevant.

You keep proving my point and you still havent addressed the lack of DNA evidence in ancient Egyptians to support your position. Where are the mummies that tested as Caucasians? Ramses II and Tut both were both tested as Black.

Super saharan is an irrelevant term.

I proved my own points and your point that Ramses II and Tut had Negroid admixture proves my point that there were Pharaohs we negroid admixture after the Nubian absoprtion which coincided with the decline of Ancient Egypt.

You havent proven anything except you are good at contradicting yourself. 96% super saharan is not what one would call an admixture.

There is no such thing as super saharan.

I am the only one making a consistent point, you are using made up words.

 

[Asclepias]

They were wrong, why do you go off debunked 3000 year old maps. And they never used the term super saharan.

How can you prove they were wrong?

NASA photography.

And they never used the term super saharan.

NASA was established by white people. They would make sure the picture appeared "right side up" to them. Do you really think they are being objective? Where is their proof the northern hemisphere is actually on top of the world instead of the bottom? Can you tell me?

 

[RWHeathenGamer]

I didnt say Arabs were completely negroid. ]

Arabs aren't negroid at all they are caucasoid. Those aren't arabs that you posted those are negroids of the Northeast African variety.

Arabs have super saharan admixture as your link proved for me.

I know those are not Arabs. They are Egyptians. Sorry you cant deal with that.

No one has super saharan admixture. Some north east african admixture(not sub saharan), or are northeast african(not sub saharan), but not a majority, and not in the North of the country where the native egyptians who founded Ancient Egypt reside.

Also, even if those are Egyptians, which you have provided no proof of, it doesn't debunk my point. I never said there weren't any blacks in Egypt, I said the opposite.

 

[WelfareQueen]

Civilization started in western Asia. The earliest recorded history is from what is now Iraq....although even early cities such as Jericho are at least 10,000 years old.

The people that are now considered "white" came from western Asia (i.e. Northern India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and the southern Russian steppes). The migration was north and east as the World climate warmed.


Egypt and Greece came much, much later.


The Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans were not obsessed by race, and saw it as largely irrelevant. Although all three civilizations saw the Slavic people of Eastern Europe as inferior (hence the origin of the word slave).

By any objective measure....Egypt was a melting pot. To say Egypt was a "Black" civilization is ridiculous. Yes, for a time Egypt extended south into Nubia....(Although many "Nubians" in present day Sudan consider themselves Arabic and not Black).

Over many centuries, the Egyptians were conquered by many peoples. The Hyksos People of western Asia (i.e. Northern Iran, Iraq, and Russia) defeated Egypt 4000 years ago, and ruled Egypt for centuries.


Hyksos - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Later, the Greeks under Alexander the Great defeated Egypt and ruled the nation for many centuries until the Romans finally took over.

Western Asia is truly the World's melting pot, with strong influences of all three races. Remember the Mongols defeated the entire region, and they were basically of Han Chinese ancestry.

Bottom line people: Don't so obsessed by race. All have contributed.

 

[RWHeathenGamer]

How can you prove they were wrong?

NASA photography.

And they never used the term super saharan.

NASA was established by white people. They would make sure the picture appeared "right side up" to them. Do you really think they are being objective?

I know they were.

 

[Asclepias]

Super saharan is an irrelevant term.

I proved my own points and your point that Ramses II and Tut had Negroid admixture proves my point that there were Pharaohs we negroid admixture after the Nubian absoprtion which coincided with the decline of Ancient Egypt.

You havent proven anything except you are good at contradicting yourself. 96% super saharan is not what one would call an admixture.

There is no such thing as super saharan.

I am the only one making a consistent point, you are using made up words.

if there is no such thing as super saharan then there is no such thing as sub saharan. I know you are confused but you do realize super is the opposite of sub dont you?

You havent made a consistent point unless you are counting how many times you have been consistently proven wrong and consistently confused.

 

[RWHeathenGamer]

You havent proven anything except you are good at contradicting yourself. 96% super saharan is not what one would call an admixture.

There is no such thing as super saharan.

I am the only one making a consistent point, you are using made up words.

if there is no such thing as super saharan then there is no such thing as sub saharan.

Wrong. There is such a thing as sub saharans. No such thing as super saharans.

section - Africana Collections: An Illustrated Guide (Library of Congress - African & Middle Eastern Division)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sub-Saharan_Africa

 

[RWHeathenGamer]

You havent proven anything except you are good at contradicting yourself. 96% super saharan is not what one would call an admixture.

There is no such thing as super saharan.

I am the only one making a consistent point, you are using made up words.

You havent made a consistent point unless you are counting how many times you have been consistently proven wrong and consistently confused.

You are the only one who is confused, you make up terms like super saharan.

 

[Asclepias]

NASA photography.

And they never used the term super saharan.

NASA was established by white people. They would make sure the picture appeared "right side up" to them. Do you really think they are being objective?

I know they were.

How were they being objective if they disregarded what the Egyptians believed which was Europe was in what we would call the southern hemisphere?

 

[WelfareQueen]

You havent proven anything except you are good at contradicting yourself. 96% super saharan is not what one would call an admixture.

There is no such thing as super saharan.

I am the only one making a consistent point, you are using made up words.

if there is no such thing as super saharan then there is no such thing as sub saharan. I know you are confused but you do realize super is the opposite of sub dont you?

You havent made a consistent point unless you are counting how many times you have been consistently proven wrong and consistently confused.

Nope...the data he provided was much stronger than yours. Modern day Egyptians are an admixture exactly as he stated and are technically classified as Berbers, like most of the people in North Africa. The reality is Blacks, Arabic, and White people have heavily mixed in that area for millennia. To say otherwise is patently ignorant.