Washington Post: Ancient Egyptians were European “we didn't find much sub-Saharan African ancestry.”

dime bag

Rising Star
Registered
in todays episode of cacting the fool





By Ben Guarino May 30 at 3:33 PM
doctor's notes.

But there was one persistent hole in ancient Egyptian identity: their chromosomes. Cool, dry permafrost can preserve prehistoric DNA like a natural freezer, but Egypt is a gene incinerator. The region is hot. Within the mummies' tombs, where scientists would hope to find genetic samples, humidity wrecked their DNA. What's more, soda ash and other chemicals used by Egyptian embalmers damaged genetic material.

A study led by researchers at the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History and the University of Tubingen in Germany managed to plug some of those genetic gaps. Researchers wrung genetic material from 151 Egyptian mummies, radiocarbon dated between Egypt's New Kingdom (the oldest at 1388 B.C.) to the Roman Period (the youngest at 426 A.D.), as reported Tuesday in the journal Nature Communications.

Johannes Krause, a University of Tubingen paleogeneticist and an author of the study, said the major finding was that “for 1,300 years, we see complete genetic continuity.” Despite repeated conquests of Egypt, by Alexander the Great, Greeks, Romans, Arabs and Assyrians — the list goes on — ancient Egyptians showed little genetic change. “The other big surprise,” Krause said, “was we didn't find much sub-Saharan African ancestry.”

The remains came from Abusir el-Meleq, an ancient Nile community in the middle of Egypt. From the mummies the scientists extracted bone, teeth and soft tissue samples. (Although Egyptian embalmers removed the brains of the deceased, the scientists wrote that “in most cases, non-macerated mummy heads still have much of their soft tissue preserved.”)

The hard samples yielded the most DNA, perhaps because the teeth and bones were protected by soft tissue or because the embalming processes left tougher material intact. After preparing the samples in a sterilized room in Germany, the researchers bathed the samples in UV radiation for an hour to minimize contamination.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.

Given Egypt's location at the intersection of Africa, Europe and Asia, and the influx of foreign rulers, Krause said he was surprised at how stable the genetics seemed to be over this period. The scientists were particularly interested in the change in ruling class at the turn of the first millennium. First came the Hellenistic dynasty, in the aftermath of Alexander the Great’s conquests, from 332 B.C. to 30 B.C., and then Roman rule from 30 B.C. to about 400 A.D. And yet the genetics of the Abusir el-Meleq community appeared to be unperturbed by shifting politics.

The scientists compared these ancient genetics with those of 100 modern Egyptians and 125 modern Ethiopians that had been previously analyzed. If you ask Egyptians, they'll say that they have become more European recently, Krause said. “We see exactly the opposite,” he said.

It was not until relatively recently in Egypt's long history that sub-Saharan genetic influences became more pronounced. “In the last 1,500 years, Egypt became more African, if you want,” Krause said.

In their paper, the researchers acknowledged that “all our genetic data were obtained from a single site in Middle Egypt and may not be representative for all of ancient Egypt.” In the south of Egypt, the authors wrote, sub-Saharan influences may have been stronger.

This study left two gaps in the Egyptian timeline that Krause wants to fill, he said. It is not clear when the African gene flow, present in modern Egyptians, occurred. Nor could the study determine the origin of the Egyptians. “The other big question is, 'Where did the ancient Egyptians come from?' ” Krause said. To answer that, scientists will have to find genomes “back further in time, in prehistory.”

DNA from ancient Egyptian mummies reveals their ancestry



 
Last edited:
:roflmao:
So explain this then crackas.

aHR0cDovL3d3dy5saXZlc2NpZW5jZS5jb20vaW1hZ2VzL2kvMDAwLzA4OS81NjQvb3JpZ2luYWwvdG9tYi1raW5nLXR1dC5qcGc=
 
These CACs only talk about the time the Ptolemies(foreigners) were there.

How come Nubia to the South had a similar culture but no other white civilization in that part of the world had a similar culture to it? They can't explain that tidbit.
 
These CACs only talk about the time the Ptolemies(foreigners) were there.

How come Nubia to the South had a similar culture but no other white civilization in that part of the world had a similar culture to it? They can't explain that tidbit.
On top of that the technology and advanced culture came from upper Egypt, which is really lower Egypt and deeper in Africa.. Note the whole upper Egypt lower Egypt was created to decive people into believing that their superior culture came from Europe, but its really just another of their deceitful lies to bury truth..
 
man talk about fucking ridiculous. BUT if Africans don't have time to defend history, white folks can explain it however they want.

shit there was a archeologist that is now claiming that the oldest homo sapien actual came from europe, due to one HALF TOOTH :lol:

http://mashable.com/2017/05/23/pre-human-fossils-europe-human-origins/#e_8ryJuN7kqu


7-million-year-old teeth add new layer to human origin story

https%3A%2F%2Fblueprint-api-production.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fuploads%2Fcard%2Fimage%2F485505%2F76d72ddd-3d66-4a0b-acdf-489591058007.jpg

The lower jaw of the 7.175 million year old 'El Graeco' from modern-day Athens, Greece.
Image: Wolfgang Gerber, University of Tübingen
By Maria GallucciMay 23, 2017
Ancient tooth fossils found in Europe may represent a new chapter in the human origin story.

The fossils, which date back more than 7 million years, belonged to an ape-like creature named Graecopithecus freybergi, researchers hypothesized in two new papers. A lower jaw bone and upper premolar were found in Greece and Bulgaria, respectively.

The findings suggest that humans split off from great apes several hundred thousand years earlier than previously thought, according to research published this week in the journal PLOS ONE.

SEE ALSO: Humans may have lived in the Americas 130,000 years ago, far earlier than thought

If true, that would mean the first pre-humans developed in Mediterranean Europe — not in sub-Saharan Africa, which is widely considered the birthplace of early humans.

Still, the studies alone aren't enough to rewrite the story of humankind's beginnings.


https%3A%2F%2Fblueprint-api-production.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fuploads%2Fcard%2Fimage%2F485814%2F31d37e8a-d875-40fc-a4d2-beb627d8f2be.jpg

"Do NOT steal my thunder," says Lucy, the early human ancestor found in present-day Ethiopia.

Image: tim boyle/Getty Images

Outside experts say they are deeply skeptical of the research. They argue the evidence is still too thin to upend decades' worth of fossil and genetic discoveries in Africa.

"The new claims about Graecopithecus need to be treated with a good deal of caution," Darren Curnoe, an associate professor at the University of New South Wales Sydney, wrote in an opinion piece for The Conversation.

"I'm open to the idea that early humans lived beyond Africa, but Graecopithecus falls well short of proving it," he said.

Many researchers assume that human and ape lineages diverged some 5 to 7 million years ago. Charles Darwin initially surmised that humans evolved in Africa, because that's the home of humans' closest ape relatives, chimpanzees and gorillas.

The oldest potential pre-human, a 6- to 7-million-year old named Sahelanthropus, was found in present-day Chad. But the Graecopithecus — nicknamed "El Graeco" — may be even older, according to an international team of researchers.

The Bulgarian premolar dates back some 7.24 million years ago, and the Greek jaw fossil dates back 7.175 million years ago, they said.


https%3A%2F%2Fblueprint-api-production.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fuploads%2Fcard%2Fimage%2F485501%2F7f041745-d018-49f8-b480-857946eb35cd.jpg

A 7.24-million-year-old upper premolar of Graecopithecus from Azmaka, Bulgaria.

Image: Wolfgang Gerber, University of Tübingen

The teams were led by Madelaine Böhme from the Senckenberg Center for Human Evolution and Palaeoenvironment in Germany and Nikolai Spassov from the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences.

Researchers used computer tomography to take cross-sections of the two fossils. They found the roots of premolars were widely fused, a feature that is characteristic of modern humans, early humans, and several pre-human ancestors. Great apes, by contrast, have two or three separate and diverging premolar roots.

The lower jaw fossil also had additional dental root features that suggested its owner belonged to the pre-human lineage.

"We were surprised by our results, as pre-humans were previously known only from sub-Saharan Africa," Jochen Fuss, a doctoral student at the University of Tübingen in Germany who conducted this part of the study, said in a press release.

But Curnoe, the skeptical professor, said studying just one feature — dental roots — on a small number of fossils wasn't enough to prove El Graeco was on Team Human, not Team Ape.

"While our place in the tree of life is now well established — chimpanzees being our closest relatives — the beginning of the human line millions of years ago continues to be shrouded in mystery," he noted.
 
Always, ya'll do remember that flick "The Gods of Egypt.":rolleyes2: Also, they wrote an article recently saying the world's oldest jawbone was European not African.:dunno::hmm:

*EDIT*

Thanks for that article above that's what I was referring to.
 
They have been busy trying their best to prove arabs are the original..nah not ever...fuck them..i aint gonna even entertain they crazy talk...
 
:roflmao:
So explain this then crackas.

aHR0cDovL3d3dy5saXZlc2NpZW5jZS5jb20vaW1hZ2VzL2kvMDAwLzA4OS81NjQvb3JpZ2luYWwvdG9tYi1raW5nLXR1dC5qcGc=

Lol yeah I don't know why if Egyptians were white, why would they paint there skin brown!! Lol.

Anybody with a half brain will
Know it's impossible for Egyptians to have white skin and blue eyes, in that African sun and climate.

The name Egypt is actually called Kemit which translate to " Land of the Blacks "
 
This old white bum was in Jack in da Crack talking about the ancient pyramids last week. They're obsessed with that shit. I was like bitch ain't got a place to stay, talking who built the original pyramids and whatnot. I peeked around the corner and laughed at him a couple times. He saw me. He was on his phone talking to one of his buddies, citing some white studies.:smh:
 
LOL. All you have to do is go there and look in the museums. You're gonna see sculptures of people that look like your drunk uncle from the BBQ. Go to Southern Egypt where a lot of the original egyptians still live and you're gonna see people that look like they're from the south side of Chicago. I know because I've been. They can lie all they want the proof is in the artifacts. You can even see in the drawings where some of the Egyptians are wearing fucking BRAIDS. Sculptures with big ass lips and shit... yeah... these were white people with braids and big ass lips and wide noses.. yep
 
"all our genetic data were obtained from a single site in Middle Egypt and may not be representative for all of ancient Egypt.”
 
At least we didn't have a car with a confederate flag on the hood

:hmm:
See if you had the secret knowledge brotha, you would know that the Confederate flag was originally the symbol of the ancient Egyptians. The original confederates WERE BLACK

LOL


(I mean, shit, why not? That's y'all's logic right? )
 
I'm not an expert but I'll never believe that the Ancient Egyptians were white..
They left behind numerous paintings, sculptures and statues. They wanted future generations to know who they were and what they did.
 
You do realize black people are the most genetically diverse on the planet? With that said I think African Americans are from west Africa(Bantu). The ancient Egyptians were still black though just of a Nubian/Cushitic extraction.

as if its impossible for a migrating people to migrate from east to west africa...

Ill tell you whats impossible, its impossible for someone to come out of a cave covered in shit,

and somehow develop a language and a culture on their own.....

cough cough cacauzoids cough cough..


ahem excuse me...
 
You do realize black people are the most genetically diverse on the planet? With that said I think African Americans are from west Africa(Bantu). The ancient Egyptians were still black though just of a Nubian/Cushitic extraction.


What is Black? Is it an ethnicity or a color? Geographical or genetic?


sounds weird to use a color and then say it's genetically diverse.

If Black Is defined by the color then I would assume that it's defined withing the darkness of someones hue.

If Black is an ethnicity then I would love to know what defines that. you used the terms Bantu and Nubian and cushitic. Are those defined within a larger umbrella defined by color of skin? Does color of skin determine culture?

if it's geographical are the words Black and African interchangeable?

Are you trying to say that no matter how light someones skin is, if they reside within the continent of Africa then they're black, and at the same time, if their skin is darker than a certain hue , then no matter what part of the world they're born in, they're African?
 
as if its impossible for a migrating people to migrate from east to west africa...

Ill tell you whats impossible, its impossible for someone to come out of a cave covered in shit,

and somehow develop a language and a culture on their own.....

cough cough cacauzoids cough cough..


ahem excuse me...
You know there are caves in parts of Africa right?
 
What is Black? Is it an ethnicity or a color? Geographical or genetic?


sounds weird to use a color and then say it's genetically diverse.

If Black Is defined by the color then I would assume that it's defined withing the darkness of someones hue.

If Black is an ethnicity then I would love to know what defines that. you used the terms Bantu and Nubian and cushitic. Are those defined within a larger umbrella defined by color of skin? Does color of skin determine culture?

if it's geographical are the words Black and African interchangeable?

Are you trying to say that no matter how light someones skin is, if they reside within the continent of Africa then they're black, and at the same time, if their skin is darker than a certain hue , then no matter what part of the world they're born in, they're African?
White folks are trying to coop all cultures over their view of the world:
White is today particularly used as a racial classifier in multiracial societies, such as North Africa, United States (White American), the United Kingdom (White British), Brazil (White Brazilian), South Africa (White South African) and Middle East. Various social constructions of whiteness have been significant to national identity, public policy, religion, population statistics, racial segregation, affirmative action, white privilege, eugenics, racial marginalization and racial quotas
 
Back
Top