@echostarlord117:
I didn't misrepresent anything. You stated that DNA studies disagreed with me with only one link as evidence. I posted two sources that didn't disagree with me.
No, you very obviously misrepresented your source. You quoted them out of context saying "ancient Egyptians were most closely related to the peoples of the Near East, particularly from the Levant", in which is incorrect. A small area of mummies was tested that showed them closely related to the people from Levant. And you just proved you never looked at your sources, because they are the EXACT SAME SOURCE. One is the direct study, the other is an article about the study.
I'm not going to dump a bunch of research on here. I provided you with enough to shoot down your claim. If you're personally unsatisfied, use Google.
Ah, yes. The classic "it's not my job to give evidence" "google it" defense. Unless you can give conclusive evidence, your point is moot.
It might not be worth it considering your bias
Yes, lord echostarlord17. Anyone who disagrees with you is biased and wrong. You are always right.
LAWL
It's not 2006, please stop.
When people refer to "ancient Egypt," they're usually talking about northeastern Egyptian society, i.e. the Pyramids of Giza and such.
Except they're referring to the ancient region of Egypt, not the modern one. Which looked like this. South is not as south as we believe, and that is still considered ancient Egypt, duh. Is North Florida not considered Florida because there are less architectural structures? Of course not.
The mummies from Abusir-el Meleq they used cover pretty much all of northern Egypt.
I'm gonna need a citation for that. And there's another thing, a huge bulk of the samples they used were late in Egypt's history, extremely late. There were some from Egypt's glory days, but they were very few. The cemetery at Abusir-el Meleq is from the Hyksos period. You know, when invaders from Levant came.
. Either way, though, it doesn't prove your point. Middle Eastern populations today share DNA with African populations, but they're not black. All it could suggest is that ancient Egyptians occasionally interbred with black African people, which doesn't take a genius to figure out. They still weren't black in the conventional sense.
tfw you don't know what Sub-Saharan means.
The link you provided doesn't even lead to a peer reviewed journal.
tfw the peer reviewed source you posted came under fire, forcing them to change a lot of their information and variables.
Like I said, it was glorified advertisement. Use more credible research
Posting the results of genetic testing is now an advertisement everyone!
and perhaps post more than just that one article. That might make your argument stronger
tfw when you criticize someone for posting one source, when you just post the same source twice.
Log in to comment