I need proof that the Ancient Egyptia...

Level 2

Since: May 11

El Monte, CA

#15716 Feb 1, 2013
Thats only because brothers anger toward whites for slavery and racism that they dont want European or Eurasian to have nothing to do with Egypt. But alot take the truth as is. I think some who say those Afronazi type statement are provacateurs making blatant petty and rushed statement to make it seem like the whole black concious movement is in denial or afraid to accept facts. To be fair though some are provoke by trolls who insist thay we never had a great pass. I wouldnt call South Indian Negro although they are black skinned yet a distant connect to Negro Blacks. Beside Babylon, Egypt was like America so I wouldnt be suprise eskimos where there too lol. And they had opportunities to rise like Joseph!
Barros Serrano wrote:
<quoted text>
Blend back in?
I don't think they were necessarily all blended.
Eurasians had been in lower Egypt for a long time. Upper Egypt was mostly black. When the kingdoms were unified, then Egypt was mixed.
Many in here are assuming that whatever Tut's DNA was, it represents all Egyptians, as if they were all identical, and uniformly mixed. They were not.
Oh you'll get into trouble with these Afronazis in here talking about Eurasian guanches!
“Look black”---this is using USA standards, where any visible African ancestry makes you black.
One study quoted in here by an Afronazi stated that Lower Egypt was 40% Eurasian.
But... when and where in Lower Egypt?
Egyptian art indicates diverse people.
Gmoney

Woodbridge, VA

#15717 Feb 1, 2013
Serrano I'm still waiting for your moms. Jeff ya moms and get it too dick in every whole...lls
Gmoney

Woodbridge, VA

#15718 Feb 1, 2013
Hole
Barros Serrano

Reserve, NM

#15720 Feb 1, 2013
Gmoney wrote:
Serrano I'm still waiting for your moms. Jeff ya moms and get it too dick in every whole...lls
Your obsessive adolescent prattle about peoples' Moms suggests to me you have a problem. I think local law enforcement should be keeping an eye on you before you start raping 80-yr old white women.

Level 2

Since: May 11

United States

#15721 Feb 1, 2013
Barros Serrano wrote:
<quoted text>
Your obsessive adolescent prattle about peoples' Moms suggests to me you have a problem. I think local law enforcement should be keeping an eye on you before you start raping 80-yr old white women.
I would ask you one thang though where did the Canary Island inhabitants go and how'd they get on thay island and build crafts where better the Northern Europeans
Barros Serrano

Reserve, NM

#15722 Feb 1, 2013
Punchojr wrote:
<quoted text> I would ask you one thang though where did the Canary Island inhabitants go and how'd they get on thay island and build crafts where better the Northern Europeans
DNA studies found Guanche descendants in Puerto Rico and the Dominican Republic. Also many were wiped out by the Spanish.

They arrived on the Canaries 6000 years ago, which is within the time-frame of the seafaring done by the Western Europea megalithic people, and it has been suggested that the Berbers were part of that, which would explain how they got there.

Level 2

Since: May 11

El Monte, CA

#15723 Feb 1, 2013
Barros Serrano wrote:
<quoted text>
DNA studies found Guanche descendants in Puerto Rico and the Dominican Republic. Also many were wiped out by the Spanish.
They arrived on the Canaries 6000 years ago, which is within the time-frame of the seafaring done by the Western Europea megalithic people, and it has been suggested that the Berbers were part of that, which would explain how they got there.
Im glad you said that. I have a friend from Morrocco and we had a conversation about him lookin Puerto Rican.I got the whole hood calling him Billy Blanco from Carlitos Way. But you do know what this give credit too right.The claims that the Moors came to Americas before Spain. Gaunches where related to Etruscans?
Shari

Manassas, VA

#15724 Feb 1, 2013
All people originated out of Africa. When the past humanoids traveled to various regions of the earth, they adapted to the environment of which they lived, thus creating people of different shades and physical features. It is called adaptation. Therefore, it is safe to say that no matter the color of our skin, we are all the same. It is environmental and cultural differences that makes up different. We all have the same skulls, bones, cells, and internal organs point blank.
Core

Nashville, TN

#15725 Feb 1, 2013
Please stop using these empty terms like Eurasian which originally meant the child of an European and Asian. The Canary Island remains used in the study were not 6,000 yrs old. There has been no study of the 30,000yr old Eurasian remains in North Africa mentioned only the 12,000yr old Tarofalt remains. Not a lot of useful data in that study and "Eurasians" question the JAMA info used by DNA Tribes to state the AEs had an african origin when they claimed the same thing, lol. The DNA Tribes studies did not rule out admixture but you can look at the current matches and I'm guessing Tut is not 'mixed'. Their first try was Blumenbach "Caucasian or White Race but that did not cover enough people. Then is was Caucasoid or original people of Europe, Mid East, and North Africa but that was not good enough. Now its Eurasian, ha. Just say White people we know thats what you want to say.

“There's enough for everyone”

Level 7

Since: Mar 07

USA

#15726 Feb 1, 2013
Just look at the history of blacks, and how they are today.

All the proof anyone needs:)
Gmoney

Woodbridge, VA

#15727 Feb 2, 2013
Barros Serrano wrote:
<quoted text>
Your obsessive adolescent prattle about peoples' Moms suggests to me you have a problem. I think local law enforcement should be keeping an eye on you before you start raping 80-yr old white women.
Ill take your sister if she ain't that old...lls
Gmoney

Woodbridge, VA

#15728 Feb 2, 2013
Core wrote:
Please stop using these empty terms like Eurasian which originally meant the child of an European and Asian. The Canary Island remains used in the study were not 6,000 yrs old. There has been no study of the 30,000yr old Eurasian remains in North Africa mentioned only the 12,000yr old Tarofalt remains. Not a lot of useful data in that study and "Eurasians" question the JAMA info used by DNA Tribes to state the AEs had an african origin when they claimed the same thing, lol. The DNA Tribes studies did not rule out admixture but you can look at the current matches and I'm guessing Tut is not 'mixed'. Their first try was Blumenbach "Caucasian or White Race but that did not cover enough people. Then is was Caucasoid or original people of Europe, Mid East, and North Africa but that was not good enough. Now its Eurasian, ha. Just say White people we know thats what you want to say.
What I want to know is how come you(Serrano rano) can call ancient middle Eastern people Eurasians but your not calling Caucasian people Afrocasians when the Caucasians came straight from Africa into Europe. Why do you choose to label a group of people one way but don't do so with the other. Is that beneficial to your bias views or are you just an idiot?
Core

Nashville, TN

#15729 Feb 2, 2013
Gmoney wrote:
<quoted text>
What I want to know is how come you(Serrano rano) can call ancient middle Eastern people Eurasians but your not calling Caucasian people Afrocasians when the Caucasians came straight from Africa into Europe. Why do you choose to label a group of people one way but don't do so with the other. Is that beneficial to your bias views or are you just an idiot?
I dont used the word Caucasian/Caucasoid/Eurasian to describe humans. Just trying to show how these racist operate. First they say they are not racist, then mention anthropology as validation for there terms. When Anthropology is used to compare Africans with other tropical people, they turn to genectics to say how far the two groups are from each other. They love using Blumenbach's caucasian or white race but then say skin color is not important to race. They argue that these mystical caucasians were living in parts of Africa before Africans but when someone provides proof of Africans in Whites you are labeled an Afrocentric, ha.
Core

Nashville, TN

#15730 Feb 2, 2013
Meant to say proof of Africans in Europe.
Gmoney

Woodbridge, VA

#15731 Feb 2, 2013
Core wrote:
<quoted text>
I dont used the word Caucasian/Caucasoid/Eurasian to describe humans. Just trying to show how these racist operate. First they say they are not racist, then mention anthropology as validation for there terms. When Anthropology is used to compare Africans with other tropical people, they turn to genectics to say how far the two groups are from each other. They love using Blumenbach's caucasian or white race but then say skin color is not important to race. They argue that these mystical caucasians were living in parts of Africa before Africans but when someone provides proof of Africans in Whites you are labeled an Afrocentric, ha.
Exactly or your racist period. Why does it seem like its impossible for Africa to be the center of almost everything to them?

“THE TRUTH MUST BE TOLD! ”

Since: Apr 08

Location hidden

#15732 Feb 2, 2013
Jeff wrote:
<quoted text>

"All other basal branches of haplogroup M are restricted to South Asia, East Asia, and Australasia, and (ii) the diversity of M in Asia is greater than in Africa (Quintana-Murci et al. 1999). It is restricted to the Near East and north and eastern Africa, concentrated in Somalia and Ethiopia (Watson et al. 1997). It is therefore unclear whether any particular M1 sequence type in the Near East arrived recently from Africa; an Asian origin with back-migration to Africa is possible."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1...
WRONG!!!

STOP YOUR FREAKING LYING. FIGURES YOU'D SHOW UP AS JEFFERY ANSWERING FOR THE BARROWHORE CHARACTER (SMDH).

THIS IS THE COLOR BLACVK
http://www.google.com/imgres...

THIS IS THE COLOR WHITE
http://www.google.com/imgres...

The presence of M haplogroup in Ethiopia, named M1, led to the proposal that haplogroup M originated in eastern Africa, approximately 60,000 years ago, and was carried towards Asia [34]. Contrary to the above, in 2006, Olivieri [35] reported that about 40,000 to 45,000 years ago, predominant North African clades M1 and U6 arose in southwestern Asia and moved together to Africa.
http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.13...

AAA STATEMENT ON RACE
Evidence from the analysis of genetics (e.g., DNA) indicates that most physical variation, about 94%, lies within so-called racial groups. Conventional geographic "racial" groupings differ from one another only in about 6% of their genes. This means that there is greater variation within "racial" groups than between them. DID YOU GET THAT? 94% OF VARIATION HAPPENS WITHIN A SO-CALLED, NOT OUTSIDE ON A PARTICULAR GROUP!!!
http://www.aaanet.org/stmts/racepp.htm

NONE PIGMENTED SKIN (SO-CALLED WHITE SKIN) ONLY BEGAN TO APPEAR APPROXIMATELY 6,000 YEARS AGO. AND THE THREE GENES RESPONSIBLE FOR PALE SKIN ONLY DEVELOPED BETWEEN 11-19,000 YBP!!!
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn22308-e...

THIS IS A NUTUFIAN
http://www.google.com/imgres...

http://i44.tinypic.com/298mip.png

YOU REALLY EXPECT US TO BELEIVE THAT THE MAN IN THE ABOVE LINKS IS A SO-CALLED WHITE???
NUTUFIANS WERE SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN SOME OF THE EARLIEST EUROPEANS. WEREN'T THEY???

We're not the one who invented "YOUR RACE BULLSHIY," that was you muthafuggas!!!

“THE TRUTH MUST BE TOLD! ”

Since: Apr 08

Location hidden

#15733 Feb 2, 2013
Jeff wrote:
<quoted text>

"All other basal branches of haplogroup M are restricted to South Asia, East Asia, and Australasia, and (ii) the diversity of M in Asia is greater than in Africa (Quintana-Murci et al. 1999). It is restricted to the Near East and north and eastern Africa, concentrated in Somalia and Ethiopia (Watson et al. 1997). It is therefore unclear whether any particular M1 sequence type in the Near East arrived recently from Africa; an Asian origin with back-migration to Africa is possible."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1...
STOP YOUR FREAKING LYING. FIGURES YOU'D SHOW UP AS JEFFERY ANSWERING FOR THE BARROWHORE CHARACTER (SMDH).

THIS IS THE COLOR BLACVK
http://www.google.com/imgres...

THIS IS THE COLOR WHITE
http://www.google.com/imgres...

The presence of M haplogroup in Ethiopia, named M1, led to the proposal that haplogroup M originated in eastern Africa, approximately 60,000 years ago, and was carried towards Asia [34]. Contrary to the above, in 2006, Olivieri [35] reported that about 40,000 to 45,000 years ago, predominant North African clades M1 and U6 arose in southwestern Asia and moved together to Africa.
http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.13...

AAA STATEMENT ON RACE
Evidence from the analysis of genetics (e.g., DNA) indicates that most physical variation, about 94%, lies within so-called racial groups. Conventional geographic "racial" groupings differ from one another only in about 6% of their genes. This means that there is greater variation within "racial" groups than between them. DID YOU GET THAT? 94% OF VARIATION HAPPENS WITHIN A SO-CALLED, NOT OUTSIDE ON A PARTICULAR GROUP!!!
http://www.aaanet.org/stmts/racepp.htm

NONE PIGMENTED SKIN (SO-CALLED WHITE SKIN) ONLY BEGAN TO APPEAR APPROXIMATELY 6,000 YEARS AGO. AND THE THREE GENES RESPONSIBLE FOR PALE SKIN ONLY DEVELOPED BETWEEN 11-19,000 YBP!!!
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn22308-e...

THIS IS A NUTUFIAN
http://www.google.com/imgres...

http://i44.tinypic.com/298mip.png

YOU REALLY EXPECT US TO BELEIVE THAT THE MAN IN THE ABOVE LINKS IS A SO-CALLED WHITE???
NUTUFIANS WERE SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN SOME OF THE EARLIEST EUROPEANS. WEREN'T THEY???

We're not the one who invented "YOUR RACE BULLSHIY," that was you muthafuggas!!!

“THE TRUTH MUST BE TOLD! ”

Since: Apr 08

Location hidden

#15734 Feb 2, 2013
@ THE JEFFERY CHARACTER,

STOP YOUR FREAKING LYING. FIGURES YOU'D SHOW UP AS JEFFERY ANSWERING FOR THE BARROWHORE CHARACTER (SMDH).

THIS IS THE COLOR BLACVK
http://www.google.com/imgres...

THIS IS THE COLOR WHITE
http://www.google.com/imgres...

The presence of M haplogroup in Ethiopia, named M1, led to the proposal that haplogroup M originated in eastern Africa, approximately 60,000 years ago, and was carried towards Asia [34]. Contrary to the above, in 2006, Olivieri [35] reported that about 40,000 to 45,000 years ago, predominant North African clades M1 and U6 arose in southwestern Asia and moved together to Africa.
http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.13...

AAA STATEMENT ON RACE
Evidence from the analysis of genetics (e.g., DNA) indicates that most physical variation, about 94%, lies within so-called racial groups. Conventional geographic "racial" groupings differ from one another only in about 6% of their genes. This means that there is greater variation within "racial" groups than between them. DID YOU GET THAT? 94% OF VARIATION HAPPENS WITHIN A SO-CALLED, NOT OUTSIDE ON A PARTICULAR GROUP!!!
http://www.aaanet.org/stmts/racepp.htm

NONE PIGMENTED SKIN (SO-CALLED WHITE SKIN) ONLY BEGAN TO APPEAR APPROXIMATELY 6,000 YEARS AGO. AND THE THREE GENES RESPONSIBLE FOR PALE SKIN ONLY DEVELOPED BETWEEN 11-19,000 YBP!!!
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn22308-e...

THIS IS A NUTUFIAN
http://www.google.com/imgres...

http://i44.tinypic.com/298mip.png

YOU REALLY EXPECT US TO BELEIVE THAT THE MAN IN THE ABOVE LINKS IS A SO-CALLED WHITE???
NUTUFIANS WERE SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN SOME OF THE EARLIEST EUROPEANS. WEREN'T THEY???

We're not the one who invented "YOUR RACE BULLSHIY," that was you muthafuggas!!!
Core

Nashville, TN

#15736 Feb 2, 2013
Gmoney wrote:
<quoted text>
Exactly or your racist period. Why does it seem like its impossible for Africa to be the center of almost everything to them?
They are victims of 18th century science and the "Dark Continent Dumb Savages" propaganda. The lack an understanding of the ebb and flow of humanity. Look at there arguments about Ydna DE/E/E1B1 and Mtdna L3 being Caucasoid/Eurasian but when a person uses their same rationale for Ydna J/R and Mtdna M/N/R0/U6 being African you magically become a racist. Same with how they define race. They love using nose and hair type but if you use skin tone you are racist. All I know is that I can see just as well as those 18th century anthropologist they love. If you believe adaptations plays a role in difference amongst humans, it would be dishonest to state that skin which covers our entire body is not important, ha.
Almoravid

Rotterdam, Netherlands

#15737 Feb 4, 2013
Repost,

"No southwest Asian specific clades for M1 or U6 were discovered. U6
and M1 frequencies in North Africa, the Middle East and
Europe do not follow similar patterns, and their sub-
clade divisions do not appear to be compatible with
their shared history reaching back to the Early Upper
Palaeolithic."

--Divorcing the Late Upper Palaeolithic demographic histories of mtDNA haplogroups M1 and U6 in Africa

Erwan Pennarun, Toomas Kivisild, Ene Metspalu, Mait Metspalu, Tuuli Reisberg, Doron M Behar, Sacha C Jones and Richard Villems

BMC Evolutionary Biology 2012, 12:234

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

African-American Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Black men not to the Japanese women's taste? (Dec '07) 6 min johnplustwomore 704
New studies show that 90% of white women lose t... 10 min ugly monkeys 6
Blacks Are Biologically Superior To Whites (Sep '12) 15 min PolakPotrafi 437
Per Capita Blacks commit 440% more crime thanWh... (May '12) 16 min JOHNS ON TOP OF IT 954
News Racist Flyer Telling Black Tenants to Be Quiet ... 22 min Sunshine 1
Why do good looking black women like white men ... (Sep '12) 23 min Cigar Face21 7,000
Go home or go to jail: Israel pressures African... 31 min Sunshine 79
All women prefer white men 37 min DerekJ 4,727
Hebrew Israelite (Feb '11) 40 min JOHNS ON TOP OF IT 121,012
Why do white women throw themselves at black men? 7 hr Mick 111
More from around the web