TheChosenChad
Whitepilled Lookistani
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2019
- Posts
- 5,132
- Reputation
- 7,174
STALIN Wrote:
egyptians were neither black nor white
they were a distict ancient race and probably predecesor to the coptic and semetic people
except for the ptolemies after alexander
and inb4 "we wuz kangz" adolf hipster shows up; STFU
Adolf Hipster wrote:
Yes Ancient Egyptians were black or at least looked like modern day Northeastafricans.
They depicted middle eastern Hyskos and Lybian people with hooked beak noses, beards and light skin just like modern day
sand niggers while they depicted themselves with dark brown skin, slim straight noses and beardless similiarly to modern day
Ethiopians, Northsudanese or Eritreans while they depicted Nubians like modern day Southsudanese Nilotic people.
Just look at these depictions from the Beni Hassan Tomb of Hyksos
oliveskinned bearded hook nosed sand niggers next to dark brown
Egyptians:
Reconstruction, notice how Egyptians got depicted darker then the bearded sand niggers:
Close comparison between Egyptian and Middle eastern face:
Battle of Megiddo:
Race in depicted by Egyptians
Adolf Hipster wrote:
its funny how stfcels cant get over these obvious depictions and even more 'moderate' anti we wuz kangz subhumans will claim
that ancient egyptians looked like levantines even though egyptians clearly depicted themselves with darker skin, beardless
and no typical hooked beak sand nigger noses like modern day semites.
This is so fucking self evident when just looking at how they depicted themselves.
Egyptians depicted themselves clearly with slim straight noses, curly,
wavy hair texture and dark skin just like modern day
Northeastafrican tribes like the Beja or Afar:
Meanwhile Nubians got depicted like Sudanese tribal
Nefrtit looked like a Ethiopian or Somalian:
Trevor Philips Wrote:
Meanwhile, this tall Caucasoid is depicted with European skin tone and physiognomy killing Niggers.
Adolf hipster wrote:
A tall
Dick washers?
Fake:
Red hair and Egyptian features?
Trevor Philips Wrote:
You dumbass partial Kike, their hair doesn't match that mummy. Red silky hair = European.
Move to Sub-Sahara since you love Niggers so much. Not replying to this subordinate non-sense! Also, it's McCartney not
"McCarthy", but I'm sure you can't read too well.
Adolf Hipster wrote:
Red hair is a chemical result of mummification
process you dumb subhuman cumskin turd
Quote:
Whilst certain environments such as those producing bog bodies are known to yield hair
of a red-brown color, in part because of the breakdown of organic matter and presence of
humic acids which impart a brown color to recovered remains, it has commonly been
assumed that this happens to all archaeological hair. This concept has been perpetuated
by popular nicknames such as "Ginger"--affectionately given to the Predynastic burial
with red hair on display in the mummy rooms at the British Museum.
Potential change to hair color can be explained more scientifically by examining the chemistry of melanin which is
responsible for hair color in life. All hair contains a mixture in varying concentration of both black-
brown eumelanin and red-yellow phaeomelanin pigments, which are susceptible to
differential chemical change under certain extreme burial conditions (for example wet
reducing conditions, or dry oxidising conditions). Importantly, phaeomelanin is much
more stable to environmental conditions than eumelanin, hence the reactions
occurring in the burial environment favor the preservation of
phaeomelanin, revealing and enhancing the red/ yellow color of
hairs containing this pigment. Color changes occur slowly under
dry oxidising conditions, such as in the burials in sand at
Hierakonpolis. Whether the conditions within the wood and plaster coffin contributed to accelerated color
change, or whether this individual naturally had more phaeomelanin pigmentation in his hair is hard to say without further
analysis.
Furthermore modern day east Africans dyed their with Hena for thousands of years.
King Tut European? @tyronelite
Adolf Hipster wrote:
THERE IS ZERO PROOF THAT KING TUT BELONGED
TO THE EUROPEAN R1B YDNA
IF SO POST THE STUDY! IN FACT IT DOESNT EXIST
SINCE IT IS A WELL KNOWN HOAX
This was not confirmed by ANY SCIENCE INSTITUTE.
Quote:
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."
Swiss genomics company iGENEA has launched a Tutankhamen DNA project based on what they say are genetic markers
that appeared on a computer screen 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, the managing 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 unravelled 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.
"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.
"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 salt, Pusch said: "It appears that they try to better sell their DNA testing kit by using the
media attention connected to King Tut."
How come Africa sucks now argurment:
Heterosexual Male Wrote:
I really don't care either way about who owns what history but just wanted to say the "How come Africans suck now"
argument isn't really a good one for why Egypt couldn't be black. Empires rise and fall and sometimes never recover. One
day America will fall. If you need an example look at Greece. They went from birthing....literally everything great in Europe
to now....well doing nothing but being sexy and banging british sloots on beaches.
DatzNotMe Wrote:
this.
but sfcels are literally fuming and crying at the thought of Egyptians not being white.
that being said daily reminder that actual white people were barbarians, the creators of civilisation were pretty much all olive
skinned people on average (not that I think this is a good thing, to an extent theres lots of benefits in anprim. imo native
Americans were the most ascended beings to ever live) from north africa to south asia.
Kind of ironic/shits come full circle now that olive skinned Mediterranean's are seen as the most beautiful people
Coping BBC wrote:
Even with the overwhelming pictorial evidence that Egyptians were Cushitic North East Africans. Even with the
many black tribes today (Afar and Beja specifically) who still look like and have a similar culture to ancient Egyptians.
Stormcucks and delusional Euro centrists will still deny the obvious truth. Great work as always man.
nay sayers:
Oh Jesus this guy is retard he tries to prove that Egyptians were black buy putting black people images next to ancient
Egyptians wall paintings.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/spea... 1fe8f47254
Quote:
Ancient Egyptians were closely related to people who lived along the eastern Mediterranean, the
analysis showed. They also shared genetic material with residents of the Turkish peninsula at the
time and Europe.
Quote:
"we didn't find much sub-Saharan African ancestry."
Quote:
"In the last 1,500 years, Egypt became more African, if you want,"
Adolf hipster wrote:
The Abusir study which you quoted from the Washington post article
but obviously didn't read, does not debunk anything I said in OP,
quite the opposite
They all had sub-Saharan admixture in the study. Around 10%
east African admixture, you obviously did not even read the study:
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Quote:
Finally, we used two methods to estimate the fractions of sub-Saharan African ancestry in ancient and modern
Egyptians. Both qpAdm35 and the f4-ratio test39 reveal that modern Egyptians inherit 8% more ancestry from
African ancestors than the three ancient Egyptians do, which is also consistent with the ADMIXTURE results
discussed above. Absolute estimates of African ancestry
using these two methods in the three ancient individuals range from 6 to 15%, and in the
modern samples from 14 to 21% depending on
method and choice of reference populations
Furthermore these Abusir samples are not even representative of
ancient Egypt but from an lower Egyptian site which received a shit
ton of middle eastern influence since centuries. Quote from the
study:
Quote: Wrote:
However we note that all our genetic data were
obtained from a single site in Middle Egypt and
may not be representative for all of ancient Egypt.
It is possible that populations in the south of
Egypt were more closely related to those of Nubia
and had a higher sub-Saharan genetic
component, in which case the argument for an
influx of sub-Saharan ancestries after the Roman
Period might only be partially valid and have to
be nuanced.
www.nature.com
Adolf hipster wrote:
It would be like testing three skeletons found at the periphery of the roman empire in England and conclude that the ancient
Romans were Anglo Saxon Nordic cucks.
Yet these heavily middle eastern influenced mummies still score 10%
east African admixture. Now just imagine how much upper Egyptian
mummies from the centre of Egypt will score. Most likely in the 20 to 40%
east African admixture.
Abusir Al Malaq is a site located in northern Egypt and has been
known for being a strongly Levantine influenced site being ruled for
centuries by the sand nigger Hyksos. So obviously these Northern
abusir samples will be less SSA:
en.wikipedia.org
Karkamesh
Might be spelling mistakes here and there, I got this straight from a image to text. If you want the original convo dm me as I have the screenshots.
Tagging High iq people and others who may like this:
@DharkDC @kjsbdfiusdf @fag112 @RealLooksmaxxer @africancel @Blackmannnns @Blackout.xl @hairyballscel @WadlowMaxxing @copingvolcel @reptiles @disillusioned @brbbrah @Muktar @Golang @Uglybrazilian @Tyronecell sorry if I didn't tag
egyptians were neither black nor white
they were a distict ancient race and probably predecesor to the coptic and semetic people
except for the ptolemies after alexander
and inb4 "we wuz kangz" adolf hipster shows up; STFU
Adolf Hipster wrote:
Yes Ancient Egyptians were black or at least looked like modern day Northeastafricans.
They depicted middle eastern Hyskos and Lybian people with hooked beak noses, beards and light skin just like modern day
sand niggers while they depicted themselves with dark brown skin, slim straight noses and beardless similiarly to modern day
Ethiopians, Northsudanese or Eritreans while they depicted Nubians like modern day Southsudanese Nilotic people.
Just look at these depictions from the Beni Hassan Tomb of Hyksos
oliveskinned bearded hook nosed sand niggers next to dark brown
Egyptians:
Reconstruction, notice how Egyptians got depicted darker then the bearded sand niggers:
Close comparison between Egyptian and Middle eastern face:
Battle of Megiddo:
Race in depicted by Egyptians
Adolf Hipster wrote:
its funny how stfcels cant get over these obvious depictions and even more 'moderate' anti we wuz kangz subhumans will claim
that ancient egyptians looked like levantines even though egyptians clearly depicted themselves with darker skin, beardless
and no typical hooked beak sand nigger noses like modern day semites.
This is so fucking self evident when just looking at how they depicted themselves.
Egyptians depicted themselves clearly with slim straight noses, curly,
wavy hair texture and dark skin just like modern day
Northeastafrican tribes like the Beja or Afar:
Meanwhile Nubians got depicted like Sudanese tribal
Nefrtit looked like a Ethiopian or Somalian:
Trevor Philips Wrote:
Meanwhile, this tall Caucasoid is depicted with European skin tone and physiognomy killing Niggers.
Adolf hipster wrote:
A tall
Dick washers?
Fake:
Red hair and Egyptian features?
Trevor Philips Wrote:
You dumbass partial Kike, their hair doesn't match that mummy. Red silky hair = European.
Move to Sub-Sahara since you love Niggers so much. Not replying to this subordinate non-sense! Also, it's McCartney not
"McCarthy", but I'm sure you can't read too well.
Adolf Hipster wrote:
Red hair is a chemical result of mummification
process you dumb subhuman cumskin turd
Quote:
Whilst certain environments such as those producing bog bodies are known to yield hair
of a red-brown color, in part because of the breakdown of organic matter and presence of
humic acids which impart a brown color to recovered remains, it has commonly been
assumed that this happens to all archaeological hair. This concept has been perpetuated
by popular nicknames such as "Ginger"--affectionately given to the Predynastic burial
with red hair on display in the mummy rooms at the British Museum.
Potential change to hair color can be explained more scientifically by examining the chemistry of melanin which is
responsible for hair color in life. All hair contains a mixture in varying concentration of both black-
brown eumelanin and red-yellow phaeomelanin pigments, which are susceptible to
differential chemical change under certain extreme burial conditions (for example wet
reducing conditions, or dry oxidising conditions). Importantly, phaeomelanin is much
more stable to environmental conditions than eumelanin, hence the reactions
occurring in the burial environment favor the preservation of
phaeomelanin, revealing and enhancing the red/ yellow color of
hairs containing this pigment. Color changes occur slowly under
dry oxidising conditions, such as in the burials in sand at
Hierakonpolis. Whether the conditions within the wood and plaster coffin contributed to accelerated color
change, or whether this individual naturally had more phaeomelanin pigmentation in his hair is hard to say without further
analysis.
Furthermore modern day east Africans dyed their with Hena for thousands of years.
King Tut European? @tyronelite
Adolf Hipster wrote:
THERE IS ZERO PROOF THAT KING TUT BELONGED
TO THE EUROPEAN R1B YDNA
IF SO POST THE STUDY! IN FACT IT DOESNT EXIST
SINCE IT IS A WELL KNOWN HOAX
This was not confirmed by ANY SCIENCE INSTITUTE.
Quote:
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."
Swiss genomics company iGENEA has launched a Tutankhamen DNA project based on what they say are genetic markers
that appeared on a computer screen 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, the managing 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 unravelled 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.
"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.
"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 salt, Pusch said: "It appears that they try to better sell their DNA testing kit by using the
media attention connected to King Tut."
How come Africa sucks now argurment:
Heterosexual Male Wrote:
I really don't care either way about who owns what history but just wanted to say the "How come Africans suck now"
argument isn't really a good one for why Egypt couldn't be black. Empires rise and fall and sometimes never recover. One
day America will fall. If you need an example look at Greece. They went from birthing....literally everything great in Europe
to now....well doing nothing but being sexy and banging british sloots on beaches.
DatzNotMe Wrote:
this.
but sfcels are literally fuming and crying at the thought of Egyptians not being white.
that being said daily reminder that actual white people were barbarians, the creators of civilisation were pretty much all olive
skinned people on average (not that I think this is a good thing, to an extent theres lots of benefits in anprim. imo native
Americans were the most ascended beings to ever live) from north africa to south asia.
Kind of ironic/shits come full circle now that olive skinned Mediterranean's are seen as the most beautiful people
Coping BBC wrote:
Even with the overwhelming pictorial evidence that Egyptians were Cushitic North East Africans. Even with the
many black tribes today (Afar and Beja specifically) who still look like and have a similar culture to ancient Egyptians.
Stormcucks and delusional Euro centrists will still deny the obvious truth. Great work as always man.
nay sayers:
Oh Jesus this guy is retard he tries to prove that Egyptians were black buy putting black people images next to ancient
Egyptians wall paintings.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/spea... 1fe8f47254
Quote:
Ancient Egyptians were closely related to people who lived along the eastern Mediterranean, the
analysis showed. They also shared genetic material with residents of the Turkish peninsula at the
time and Europe.
Quote:
"we didn't find much sub-Saharan African ancestry."
Quote:
"In the last 1,500 years, Egypt became more African, if you want,"
Adolf hipster wrote:
The Abusir study which you quoted from the Washington post article
but obviously didn't read, does not debunk anything I said in OP,
quite the opposite
They all had sub-Saharan admixture in the study. Around 10%
east African admixture, you obviously did not even read the study:
Ancient Egyptian mummy genomes suggest an increase of Sub-Saharan African ancestry in post-Roman periods
Egypt, located on the isthmus of Africa, is an ideal region to study historical population dynamics due to its geographic location and documented interactions with ancient civilizations in Africa, Asia and Europe. Particularly, in the first millennium ...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Quote:
Finally, we used two methods to estimate the fractions of sub-Saharan African ancestry in ancient and modern
Egyptians. Both qpAdm35 and the f4-ratio test39 reveal that modern Egyptians inherit 8% more ancestry from
African ancestors than the three ancient Egyptians do, which is also consistent with the ADMIXTURE results
discussed above. Absolute estimates of African ancestry
using these two methods in the three ancient individuals range from 6 to 15%, and in the
modern samples from 14 to 21% depending on
method and choice of reference populations
Furthermore these Abusir samples are not even representative of
ancient Egypt but from an lower Egyptian site which received a shit
ton of middle eastern influence since centuries. Quote from the
study:
Quote: Wrote:
However we note that all our genetic data were
obtained from a single site in Middle Egypt and
may not be representative for all of ancient Egypt.
It is possible that populations in the south of
Egypt were more closely related to those of Nubia
and had a higher sub-Saharan genetic
component, in which case the argument for an
influx of sub-Saharan ancestries after the Roman
Period might only be partially valid and have to
be nuanced.
Ancient Egyptian mummy genomes suggest an increase of Sub-Saharan African ancestry in post-Roman periods - Nature Communications
Archaeological and historical records had shown ancient Egypt before and after Ptolemaic and Roman periods to be a hub of human migration and exchange. Here, Schuenemann and colleagues analyse ancient mitochondrial and nuclear DNA to investigate the genetic history of Egypt.
www.nature.com
Adolf hipster wrote:
It would be like testing three skeletons found at the periphery of the roman empire in England and conclude that the ancient
Romans were Anglo Saxon Nordic cucks.
Yet these heavily middle eastern influenced mummies still score 10%
east African admixture. Now just imagine how much upper Egyptian
mummies from the centre of Egypt will score. Most likely in the 20 to 40%
east African admixture.
Abusir Al Malaq is a site located in northern Egypt and has been
known for being a strongly Levantine influenced site being ruled for
centuries by the sand nigger Hyksos. So obviously these Northern
abusir samples will be less SSA:
Hyksos - Wikipedia
Might be spelling mistakes here and there, I got this straight from a image to text. If you want the original convo dm me as I have the screenshots.
Tagging High iq people and others who may like this:
@DharkDC @kjsbdfiusdf @fag112 @RealLooksmaxxer @africancel @Blackmannnns @Blackout.xl @hairyballscel @WadlowMaxxing @copingvolcel @reptiles @disillusioned @brbbrah @Muktar @Golang @Uglybrazilian @Tyronecell sorry if I didn't tag
