So Feb 17th they will be revealing King Tut's DNA results
Options
Comments
-
DarcSkies777 wrote: »Uh why the hell do I have to wait for my comments to be moderated -_-
Because you can't say "black" that many times in a single post without it being monitored.....? ! -
BOSS KTULU wrote: »You can cherry pick images, but we both know you're doing it. The first one isn't even a human being. Dude got a bird head.
Yeah because religious people NEVER wear funny hats.
Ok if I'm trying to show you that Egyptians were black and you claim they were all red bone at best and were not black. Why the hell wouldnt I post the dark skinned images? I dont ask people to take my word for anything when I can just show the proof.
Yeah, it's called being light skinned.For every literally black image, there's an equally literally white one available, but I don't think the Egyptians were either color.
BLackadee black black black!Because you can't say "black" that many times in a single post without it being monitored.....? ! -
That ain't a hat, that's Thoth.
-
King Tut wasn't ? . Only reason we know his name is because his tomb had better security than the other Pharaohs.
Ramesses II was dat ? :tu -
-
It's true, King Tut didn't really do anything of interest. He was just literally the golden boy of Egyptology for a long time.
-
you also forgot that diop showed other african people who use red clay to put on their skin. so i got to side with dark.
-
If they put red clay on their skin, they're self-hating blacks.
-
BOSS KTULU wrote: »You can cherry pick images, but we both know you're doing it. The first one isn't even a human being. Dude got a bird head.
For every literally black image, there's an equally literally white one available, but I don't think the Egyptians were either color.
white actual ancient Egyptian ARTIFACTS? -
DarcSkies777 wrote: »Why are all these people with 1 post mysteriously showing up LOL
I'm sorry but I'm gonna go ahead and believe the many published books researched many times over by people with PhDs on the subject, Egyptian depictions of THEMSELVES smh, statues that show wide nosed people, paintings of people with hairstyles/beards you cant get unless your ? is nappy, etc etc etc.
Sorry but facts over brainwashing and decades of white racists who depict Cleopatra as Liz Taylor any day.
Once again you confuse NATIONALITY with race.
I wonder if a bunch of black people could get away with saying the Greeks really looked like Wesley Snipes even though they clearly depict themselves as WHITE. It's ? at this point really.
What im tryna stress is that sri-lankans and the like have significant melanin but they don't classify as black. The whole nationality-race thing is simple but complex at the same time
As for the PhD holders comment - there've been as many PhD holders who've disputed the fact (that Egyptians were black) as those who have proposed it. I've read Cheikh Anta Diop's works and to me they're the most consistent. His argument is that Egypt was a cosmopolitan country with a diverse group of ethnicities and therefore the whole populace was not strictly black and possibly the dominant ethnicity was a hybrid of a number of ethnic groups - sub saharan negroid included
As for the '1 posters', blame that on admins for messing up post counts after the upgrade -
No his argument was that there were no dark skinned Egyptians and at best they were redboned. And even after clearly seeing pictures he calls it "cherry picking" which leads me to believe he's one of those "believe what I want to believe even when proven wrong" types. Secondly, it's not simply & complex just simple. Also the culture wasnt mixed until the Greeks came along WAYYY after a lot of the advancements Egypt made were completed. Like the Pyramids and temples, etc.What im tryna stress is that sri-lankans and the like have significant melanin but they don't classify as black. The whole nationality-race thing is simple but complex at the same time
As for the PhD holders comment - there've been as many PhD holders who've disputed the fact (that Egyptians were black) as those who have proposed it. I've read Cheikh Anta Diop's works and to me they're the most consistent. His argument is that Egypt was a cosmopolitan country with a diverse group of ethnicities and therefore the whole populace was not strictly black and possibly the dominant ethnicity was a hybrid of a number of ethnic groups - sub saharan negroid included
As for the '1 posters', blame that on admins for messing up post counts after the upgrade
As for the PhDs of course there are SOME people saying different things. Just like there are SOME PhDs who dont believe in the Big Bang. But the overwhelming majority do. So why would I listen to the Mad Scientist on the side that still believe 'Jesus Did It and here's the proof?" I simply havent found a credible PhD, books, research, etc that doesnt clearly say that the Ancient Egyptians were BLACK. What I do know is non-black people have a problem with admitting that blacks could EVER do anything as great as the Egyptians do and desperately hold on to the idea that blacks have made no contribution to the world other than MLK & Hip-Hop.
If the Ancient Egyptians were anything but black there wouldnt be a controversy. No matter how much clear evidence is shown people still CHOOSE to be in denial because of an inability to see blacks as anything but savage and spear chuckers.
So when you can actually show me images, documentation, HARD CORE PROOF, as I have shown then you both have a point. Until then you're just passive aggressive non-blacks hating in a passive aggressive way. -
DarcSkies777 wrote: »the culture wasnt mixed until the Greeks came along.
Preposterous. Ancient Egypt was the spot. ? from all over was chilling in the 'gypt. ? even got sacked by the Persians way before Greece came into play.
That's because you have the foregone conclusion that any such research is racist. Don't make me namedrop Zahi Hawass.I simply havent found a credible PhD, books, research, etc that doesnt clearly say that the Ancient Egyptians were BLACK.
I'm not actually impressed with the accomplishments of an ancient religious dictatorship built on the backs of slaves and conquered peoples like Egypt was. I don't think Egypt was a "great" society.What I do know is non-black people have a problem with admitting that blacks could EVER do anything as great as the Egyptians do -
Not racist in terms of "I'll never admit n.iggers were ever smart...NEVERRR!!!" I mean racist in terms of the sub-conscience belief that blacks could never so any thing other than throw spears and peel bananas. Im not saying anybody who doesnt think/know Egyptians were black go to Neo-? meetings every tuesday. Just saying they probably have a low opinion of blacks in general and therefore cant imagine any black civilian could ever exist let alone putting the words black & civilized in the same sentence in the first place.That's because you have the foregone conclusion that any such research is racist.
And name drop all you want. All I'm asking for is hard core proof. So if this Zahi person can debunk the hundreds of experts who say differently then by-all-means lets hear it. -
Neo Nazis don't meet on Tuesdays.
-
Lol..........
-
DarcSkies777 wrote: »Not racist in terms of "I'll never admit n.iggers were ever smart...NEVERRR!!!" I mean racist in terms of the sub-conscience belief that blacks could never so any thing other than throw spears and peel bananas. Im not saying anybody who doesnt think/know Egyptians were black go to Neo-? meetings every tuesday. Just saying they probably have a low opinion of blacks in general and therefore cant imagine any black civilian could ever exist let alone putting the words black & civilized in the same sentence in the first place.
And name drop all you want. All I'm asking for is hard core proof. So if this Zahi person can debunk the hundreds of experts who say differently then by-all-means lets hear it.
It makes no sense to use modern day perception of 'race'/nationality etc to describe the ancients
those who are truelly interested in history know that the greatest civilisations known to us were located on the afrikan continent. there was once a time hundreds of thousands of scholars from mali travelled all the way to india to spread knowledge(Islamic Timbuktu period). To understand European history one must understand Afrikan/Asian history, every historian with a passion for what he or she does know this.
I guess you and ktulu don't realize that zahi hawass never said the egyptians weren't 'blacks', the only thing he debunked was the american perception of the diversity of man....'you people' tend to put people in boxes and believe thats how the world is. When you vote in your land you even have to fill in 'what' you are right>?during election times they poll white/black people etc thats why half of you so called 'blacks' in the states don't even know they arén't even considered 'black' in Afrika ....I hope you realize this view you have does not ref;ect reality and that when some americans demanded the egyptians to be labeled blacks zahi hawass said no, and said they were their own kind of people he distant himself from that ? up view . Egypt is diverse as ? , that was so during the reign of the one you call khufu and it is that way now.
before the automobile we were nomadic as ? , kamels and donkeys walk(ed) on cruise control, from tangier to timbuktu to memphis, bedouin and budja's were ? a long time ago son, I could tell you stories from (great) grandfathers/mothers who went to mekka via a donkey but ended up in malta, I bet other posters who originate from this region can tell you similair stories regarding their fam n friens. If it makes you 2 feel good; your living an illusion anyway, just continue believing in this race ? and whatever you feel some people who lived thosuands of years ago were. It's obvious that one of you wants them to be redskin and the other black, so both of you alrady believe in that ? . or are you still convicing yourselves? -
-
smh....watch and see the media gonna lie that he's not a black man,knowing damn well he's a BROTHA,but you know since this world is ran by white supremacy and Satanism,they gonna tamper with ? and make a whole lie
-
BOSS KTULU wrote: »If they put red clay on their skin, they're self-hating blacks.
wasnt no self hate just for "dressing" purposes and thats just what they did(forgot why they did that but this is something)
also you forget that the egyptians gave credit and praise to the ethiopians for the development of their technology so they were black in the since. -
THis is my point. There is only 4 races on the planet: Afrikan, Caucasion, Asain and Native American.It makes no sense to use modern day perception of 'race'/nationality etc to describe the ancients
Society back then wasnt mixed enough (at that particular time) for it to be mixed to the point you all are claiming. So if they werent Asian, Caucasian, Native American what were they? BLACK.
We wouldnt be having this discussion about Mayans or Aztecs. We all just looked at how they depicted themselves and ? . But when blacks are concerned its a different story. 500 years from now two people are going to be online via telekenetics arguing about whether MLK & Barakka Obama were really "BLACK" because their pictures are going to fade and when redrawn gonna start looking lighter...and lighter...and lighter. -
DarcSkies777 wrote: »There is only 4 races on the planet: Afrikan, Caucasion, Asain and Native American.
Why do you hold this archaic belief?
If there are 4 races, what happened to make the Native Americans a distinct race from the Asians when we know for a fact the Native Americans got here when Asians crossed over the frozen Bering Straight 40,000 years ago? Why are they not still the Asian race?
And what are Samoans? They're not native to America, but they're not exactly Asian, are they? Most of them look like they eat Asians for breakfast.
I'm surprised that you maintain this 18th century notion of "races." It's hilarious.
Explain to me what a "race" of human beings is, Josh. -
Because smart people who research DNA and did extensive study on this say so and I believe them because unlike you and the other dude they dont have a "take my word for it" approach to what they view as fact.Why do you hold this archaic belief?
And please dont give me that "there's only one race...the human race" ? I'm not naive. I live in the real world. And in the real world race matters. A LOT.
Show me proof the Ancient Egyptians were not black as I have shown proof that they were. In name, in visual evidence not to mention common sense.
Same thing that made a bunch of black people turn white. After thousands of years there are mutations.If there are 4 races, what happened to make the Native Americans a distinct race from the Asians when we know for a fact the Native Americans got here when Asians crossed over the frozen Bering Straight 40,000 years ago? Why are they not still the Asian race? -
DarcSkies777 wrote: »Because smart people who research DNA and did extensive study on this say so
No, they do not. The only racial revelation from DNA research is that there is more diversity within a so-called race than there is between different so-called races. In other words, the old 4 (or 5) races theory is perfectly debunked.
And you haven't provided any evidence that the Egyptians were Charlie Murphy darkness. You've cherry picked some pictures and selectively ignored symbolism of color in heiroglyphs and then repeatedly made fallacious appeals to authority.
They're going to reveal that Tut was Korean anyway. -
Are you reading these threads via some type of Morse Code attachment on your iPhone or can you just not see the pictures? And why is a dark skinned picture that clearly shows dark skinned COMPLEXIONS (no any ? paint) symbolism. But when they're light skinned images they are the real people?And you haven't provided any evidence that the Egyptians were Charlie Murphy darkness.
Also continuously not agreeing or being Socratic does not equate to facts. Im just asking you to prove that they werent dark-skinned that's all. Never said they were ALL dark-skinned. But you said none were and I showed clear evidence that they were. Via name meanings and even images. So when you can SHOW ME and not just TELL ME I'll believe it. Until then I dont know what more I can say because you are choosing not to acknowledge evidence that debunks what you claim. -
All of your "evidence" so far has been mega old debunked or misunderstood stuff. This is all about an irrational attachment to a notion that boosts your self esteem. Plus, I've been trolling you the entire time. I don't do genuine posting on the IC. That's what Tha Corner is for. Even the first two sentences in this post are a troll. You're my main man and you should post at TC instead of here on this cyber wasteland.
