|
Post by asante on Apr 15, 2018 21:25:04 GMT -5
The Egyptian DNA case : truth and lies
On May 31st 2017, all the media of the Western world announced that the DNA of 90 Egyptian mummies has just been finally deciphered. They all seem to be of Middle Eastern and European origin. The information goes around the world, delights the supporters of a white Egypt and shakes the Africans and the African diaspora, who had already taken ownership of this civilization. We have got into possession this study and we will demonstrate here that it is dishonest from the beginning to the end, and that the Egyptian civilization belongs – if proof still needed – strictly to the Black African world. Queen Ndjemt, daughter of Pharaoh Ramesu Kha-m-Waset (Ramesses XI) and wife of pharaoh-priest Heri Horo. Her father was one of the last pharaohs of the great indigenous Egyptian dynasties, around 1070 BC. As you can see, she was undoubtedly African. Most likely her hair had been involuntarily straightened during the mummification process, as we have shown here.
How to determine which people are at the origin of a civilization? The choice of sites
Imagine today that the French civilization has disappeared and that in 2000 years we try to determine which people were at its origin. The first thing we should do is to consult the documents of the time period to find out what were the important places of this ancient territory. Then we would realize that the greatest people of France were buried in royal tombs in the Parisian Region and also at the Panthéon in Paris. After excavating the remains it would be easy to determine that the French civilization was the work of the white people. If, on the other hand, one were to go to Marseilles in the south, so many Berbers and Arabs would be found in the cemeteries, and one would falsely conclude that France was the work of the Berbers and the Arabs. It is the same with the American civilization today. You would have to go to the Arlington Cemetery in Virginia and not to any cemetery in Miami filled with Puerto Ricans, Cubans, Venezuelans, Nicaraguans etc… The choice of the Time Period
In the same way, the historical documents would show that there was an influx of Arabs and Berbers in the city of Marseilles during the middle of the 20th century. If we insist on knowing who were the founders of the city, the older remains, those of the lower antiquity in particular, would be indicative. Therefore, in order to determine the people at the origin of a civilization, everything we should begin with the historical documentation, in order to know which sites to search and what time period to take into account. What do the Egyptian historical documents say? They say this : - 4000 BC: birth, between Sudan and southern Egypt, of the very first dynasty; which will eventually conquer the whole north around 3300 BC.
- From 3300 BC to 1730 BC ruled only these dynasties originating from southern Egypt and Sudan.
- Between 1730 BC and 1540 BC, a dynasty of invaders, called Hyksos, probably white, conquered the north of Egypt. The indigenous kings withdrew to their original bastion, the south.
- Between 1540 BC and 1070 BC, the indigenous dynasties conquered the north and ruled over the whole kingdom again.
- Between 1070 BC and 663 BC, black Libyans associated with Whites ruled over the north, the indigenous authority retreating, once again, to the south. Then the Sudanese came and ruled over the whole territory.
- Between 663 BC and 332 BC, a chaotic succession of white Persian invaders and Egyptians ruled the country.
- From 332 BC to 641 AD, the Greeks and the Romans, who entered by the north, dominated.
- And from 641 AD to the present day we have an Arab domination, with Turkish and British intervals.
What does that mean? It means that if we want to accurately genetically determine who the ancient Egyptians were, we should take the remains of the Kings from the south, at the Valley of the Kings, in Luxor. And top priority should be given to the remains that dated between 4000 BC and 1730 BC and those dated between 1540 BC and 1070 BC. This has already been done. What do the previous genetic researches say about the ancient Egyptians? The main study dates from 2012 and was conducted by the US laboratory DNA Tribes. It dealt with three of the most famous Pharaohs: Amenhotep III, Tutankhamen and another Pharaoh, whose identity is uncertain. It should be Smenkaré or Akhenaten. Moreover the maternal grandparents of Akhenaton, the influential priests Yuya and Tuya have been included in the study. These kings ruled around 1400 BC, so in the reliable period. The result is unquestionable: they come from Africa, south of Sahara. DNA Tribes Results : Index of genetic compatibility of 326 with Southern Africa, 323 with Great Lakes and 83 with Central Africa and West Africa. This study is the absolute reference in genetics to ancient Egyptians. For comparison, the Semitic whites, European or Berbers are between 3 and 7 of compatibility.
In addition to that, in 2012 a study conducted by Zahi Hawass and al. published in the BMJ showed that the pharaoh Ramesu Hekayunu (Ramesses III) – who ruled around 1200 BC, carries the E1b1a gene, which is an African gene. This gene is quasi-specific to populations of Africa south of Sahara and to Africans in the Americas. It is maximal among Angolans for example. The Westerners have remained silent on these two studies, which contrasts with today’s media hustle and bustle. They pretend that the present study is the first.
In 2013, DNA Tribes went further with the DNA of Ramesu Hekayunu (Ramses III) and his son Pentawret. The results are similar : they are related to the peoples of the Great Lakes, Southern Africa, Central Africa/West Africa, and the horn of Africa.
On the left Tutankhamen and his wife Queen Ankh-Sen-Imana, daughter of Akhenaten and Nefertiti ; On the right the great pharaoh Imanahotep Hekawaset (Amenhotep III), father of Akhenaten.
Pharaoh Ramesu Hekayunu (Ramesses III) at the left Pharaoh Akhenaten with his African features at the right
What has actually done the study that makes so much noise today? The study by Johannes Krause of the Max Planck Institute in Germany pre-selected 91 mummies found in one (1) cemetery in northern Egypt. It is a single site. Was Professor Johannes Krause afraid to fetch the Egyptians in the South, where they are crowded?Here is, in north of Egypt, the place where the mummies of Johannes Krause come from. This image comes from his own paper. Look far at the bottom right, it is Luxor, where the Pharaohs are buried. Even when the pharaoh died to the north, his body was taken to the south, just as today, people still prefer to be buried in their villages. The Egyptians knew perfectly well that they came from the south.
But that’s not all. Of these 91 mummies, how many are dated in the time periods we are interested in (4000-1730, 1540-1070)? Well! simple answer: 4. 4 mummies out of the 91 selected date from the great periods of ruling by native Egyptians. Only 4 mummies date from the time period before 1070 BC. All the others are recent. And how many of these 91 date from the domination of the Greek and Roman whites? 48! i.e most of them. This sample is then invalid and cannot determine the origin of the ancient Egyptians. Should we continue our critic of this study? We can stop here. But let’s be kind and continue.
Of the 91 mummies how many were actually genetically analyzed to determine who the ancient Egyptians were? Get this : 3. Johannes Krause begins by saying: “Here we present 90 mitochondrial genomes as well as genome-wide data sets from three individuals obtained from Egyptian mummies”. The study that makes so much noise all over the world today and which is supposed to have determined who the Egyptians were is based on only 3 mummies. 3 !!!!!! Of these 3 mummies, how many date from the great ruling by the native Egyptians? Simple answer: 0. The mummy JK2134 dates from between 776 BC and 669 BC, the mummy JK2911 dates from 769-560 BC. The mummy JK2888 dates from 97-2 BC. All these mummies date from the time when Egypt in the north was dominated by white foreigners or had a large white immigrant population. These mummies cannot, in any way, be representative of the people or the kings of ancient Egypt. This is a summary image of the study in question. 3 mummies!
In short the mummies supposed to say that the Egyptians were white:
- Come from a single and irrelevant site.
- Were taken in the north of Egypt which was repeatedly under the rule of white foreigners and partly populated by white immigrants.
- Are only 3, which is ridiculously small.
- Do not date, for any of them, from the ruling of the great indigenous Egyptians.
- All of them date from the late period, that is a period of decline and occupation, where the whites had infiltrated from the north.
This sample has therefore zero value. And there’s no point in continuing to discuss it. So do the Westerners want to pride themselves on the fact that they found 3 whites out of 10 million ancient Egyptians? They can have those them. We are not stingy. According to their heretical logic, in 2000 years Jamaicans will be found in the British tombs and it will then be concluded that Queen Elizabeth II and the English were black. In 2000 years, Indian people will be found in the Tanzanian tombs. It will also be concluded that Julius Nyerere and the Tanzanians were Indian.
Moreover, the University of Tübingen, in Germany, to which is attached Mr Krause, has been talked about recently. They pretended that a European monkey with premolars tied is the first hominid in the world, meaning that humanity was not born in Africa. We are therefore dealing here with racist ideologists.
The West really thought we were going to stop at the sensational title of this study and not go deep into it. This is terrible misjudgment of the new African generation Cheikh Anta Diop has created. We want to say that nothing and no one will ever put us back in the mental condition of eternal slave again. With science, we will have no concession and no pity, with those who dare to put themselves through our indestructible bond with our glorious ancestors. Our determination is total.
Black Africans are the civilizers of humanity and they will never come down from this historic pedestal anymore. They invented civilization, in Africa, and introduced it to Asia, America and Europe. Everyone will learn to get back to his place in history. It is with this new pride, this infinite confidence in our capacities, that we will rebuild Africa.
That being said, considering the shock wave this study has created in the black communities, we believe that the maximum number of Africans must acquire solid scientific knowledge in order to be able to decipher the lies contained in the scientific literature. But above all it is also urgent that we control our media space in order to make our voice heard; it is the voice of truth.
Life, Health and Strength to the Energies of Our Ancestors! Hotep ! By : Lisapo ya Kama
en.lisapoyakama.org/the-egyptian-dna-case-truth-and-lies/
|
|
|
Post by asante on Apr 16, 2018 11:35:15 GMT -5
A generation ago in the early 90's the Western scholars attempted to pull the same stunt only with the physical anthropology. The study used back then was Brace 1993 Clines and Clusters. The fuckery of that study has been thoroughly exposed on the old Egyptsearch forum, and further called out by Africanist scholars such as SOY Keita in 2005 for it's fallacies and ill intentions. "However, Brace et al. (1993) find that a series of upper Egyptian/Nubian epipalaeolithic crania affiliate by cluster analysis with groups they designate "sub-Saharan African" or just simply "African" (from which they incorrectly exclude the Maghreb, Sudan, and the Horn of Africa), whereas post-Badarian southern predynastic and a late dynastic northern series (called "E" or Gizeh) cluster together, and secondarily with Europeans. In the primary cluster with the Egyptian groups are also remains representing populations from the ancient Sudan and recent Somalia. Brace et al. (1993) seemingly interpret these results as indicating a population relationship from Scandinavia to the Horn of Africa, although the mechanism for this is not clearly stated; they also state that the Egyptians had no relationship with sub-Saharan Africans, a group that they nearly treat (incorrectly) as monolithic, although sometimes seemingly including Somalia, which directly undermines aspects of their claims. Sub-Saharan Africa does not define/delimit authentic Africanity." (S.O.Y. Keita. "Early Nile Valley Farmers from El-Badari: Aboriginals or "European" Agro-Nostratic Immigrants? Craniometric Affinities Considered With Other Data". Journal of Black Studies, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 191-208 (2005)
egyptsearchreloaded.proboards.com/thread/15/basic-database-Hapi-valley-studies
Western scholars commenced this debunked study strictly in the name of "white supremacy". They did that in response to the profound affects of the Afrocentric movement between 70 and mid 90's that was kicked off by Cheikh Anta Diop and carried by Dr. John Henricke Clarke, Ivan Van Sertima, Dr. Ben J., Ashra Kwesi, Ronoko Rashidi etc etc,. Their dismantling of common white lies and dept knowledge on Africa sanctified in the black communities across the globe.
This generation of Western white supremacist are trying to play the deny the Africanity of Kemet game with genetics rather than anthropology. Please spread this information as much as possible, because many of our people don't know how to respond to the lies of these Devils.
|
|
|
Post by kel on Apr 16, 2018 13:03:06 GMT -5
this has been dealt with a million times here and egyptsearch.............nothing to see here.
|
|
|
Post by kel on Apr 16, 2018 18:45:49 GMT -5
why so sensitive ?
no need to retread old ground.
|
|
|
Post by zarahan on Sept 29, 2018 22:27:09 GMT -5
Asante presents a good roundup of several items..
|
|
|
Post by asante on Sept 30, 2018 15:16:08 GMT -5
Thanks Z! The study has "officially" debunked (in Western academia that is) been debunked! FROM: -Gourdine JP, Keita SOY, Gourdine JL, Anselin A, 2018. Ancient Egyptian Genomes from northern Egypt Graphic courtesy of Zaharan.
|
|
|
Post by socrates on Oct 4, 2018 7:09:48 GMT -5
Forgive me for contradicting Asante, but the company, and I say well, the company DNA Tribes lacks any rigour within academic and scientific institutions, which is why it publishes privately and privately and not in large scientific papers. Secondly, the refutation of the news by taking data from certain pro-Afrocentrism pages seems to me to disqualify them first. I am of Mediterranean origin and if it were not for the fact that these types of movements that you represent or pretend to defend are often laughed at, like the arguments of the Flat Earth Society. I hope this comment will serve you and all those who visit and commune with this thought, there are more ethnic groups than the descendants of African blacks and Anglo-Saxon whites, and all of us who are in that absurd war to claim the greatest past are very fed up with this pseudo-history or pseudo-science to plunder the past of Mediterranean peoples or the ancient Middle East. So open your eyes and stop to think if founding beliefs on such weak pillars can't take its toll on you tomorrow.
|
|
|
Post by anansi on Oct 5, 2018 1:01:23 GMT -5
Socrates said [Secondly, the refutation of the news by taking data from certain pro-Afrocentrism pages seems to me to disqualify them first]
Why?? because you and others choose to label Afrocentrism as a negative especially when dealing with actual African societies, of which A.E was??
You want to shoot the messenger rather than listen to the message, you tapped DNA tribe while remaining silent on the Hawass study a friend to no so-called Afrocentrist version of AE's history.
As indicated for a long time now, what was to become pharaonic Egypt was a push north from Sudan to down stream Egypt, we know this from the blacktopped Pottery of Sudanese origins in the so-called predynastic kingdoms of Egypt where they settled ,we knew that the folks of that era in Egypt differs very little in physical appearances of the Sudan, we knew for quite some time now that Sudanese kings with royal pharaonic paraphernalia were present in lower Sudan aka Nubian and Upper Egypt, their presence felt as far away as Nekhen city of the Hawk a Nubian totemic symbol whose etching was found on the incense burner found at Qustul in Nubia a kingdom called Ta-Seti 300yrs before it's appearance in Dynastic Egypt. BTW Nekhen was the breakaway city where Egypt became "Egypt" .
|
|
|
Post by anansi on Oct 5, 2018 1:27:28 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by asante on Oct 5, 2018 23:10:17 GMT -5
Forgive me for contradicting Asante, but the company, and I say well, the company DNA Tribes lacks any rigour within academic and scientific institutions, Says who? Other DNA data show substantial African affinity: “Results that are likely reliable are from studies that analyzed short tandem repeats (STRs) from Amarna royal mummies5 (1,300 BC), and of Ramesses III (1,200 BC)6; Ramesses III had the Y chromosome haplogroup E1b1a, an old African lineage7. Our analysis of STRs from Amarna and Ramesside royal mummies with popAffiliator18 based on the same published data5,6 indicates a 41.7% to 93.9% probability of SSA affinities (see Table 1); most of the individuals had a greater probability of affiliation with “SSA” which is not the only way to be “African”- a point worth repeating.”
I'm not sure what "data" was taken from a "pro-Afrocentrism page", but what I posted is an article that properly analyzes and contextualizes the faulty study that many non Africans (and Coons) have ran with in the last year. If you have a problem with the contextualization of the studies analysis then that's on you. The analysis that hurt your feeling has apparently been corroborated by the peer reviewed publication posted above. I personally don't care what depigmented people think. Bye!
|
|
|
Post by asante on Oct 6, 2018 11:03:24 GMT -5
This new study has really hurt the feelings of alot of "Eurasians". When I posted this information over on a thread on Forum Biodiversity (only to spread the word far and wide on this refutation) a few days ago they took days to approve that thread. Then it was only approved incidentally right after I had given up there and created the thread on Anthroscape (which does not have an approval process for new posters). Even after the thread has been created over there, their mods will not approve any additional post of mines within the thread (that I created). My first response they approved in about 24 hours after the page that it was posted on had been superseded by another one or multiple. A blatant and shameless propaganda tactic aimed to make the viewing audience think that their mayo soldiers have legitimate rebuttals. They are pathetic, and should never be taken seriously!
Notice how despite white trolls popping up every now and then over here or the Old ES, black forums have never resorted to such disgraceful censorship tactics as fearfully approving thought provoking post that do not go along with a designated agenda. That is the testament to the fact that we have the absolute truth on our side. When I posted my response to their mayo soldier Arch Hades defying his twisted cave critter logic three days ago, the mods refused to approve my response. They did the same thing over on Anthroscape the other day too. They actually went as far as banning me. Caucasians and off white want to be Caucasians are really hurt over the truth catching up with their lies. Let's keep winning family, each one teach one! PS: Also notice the coons who entertain the cave critter logic by accepting their fixed theories, and trying to debate (begging them for reason in the logic) with them about their fixed theories. Notice how they are extremely chummy with these pseudo science Nazis. Some coons even joined the mayo party that was thrown after this study was released last year. "One of the fixed theories that they accept to remain "chummy" with those Nazis is that the Natufians were not Africoid migrants, but were some sort of "Basal Eurasian" Caucasoid. In order for the Nazis to have any sort of leg to stand on this has to be accepted, and ban anybody who proves otherwise. That's why the "black people" or Coons over there are so complacent with accepting their BS, and try to throw the real ones off by incorporating some white liberal approved Afrocentrism into their rebuttals. Soft shoe cooning at it's finest. The coons role in this discussion is to make this model of debate the standard for our people who may be searching online for scientific enlightenment regarding ancient history. This soft shoe cooning is only in place to help Caucasians hang in the discussion. Then like to front as though that truth compromising style of debate that allows Caucasians to hang with us is the "reasonable" form of discussion with them. None of those coons who hang and chum around with those pseudo-science Nazis on those sites (some of these coons are also on the old Egyptsearch as well) are to be trusted. They are trying to convince us to assert the truth about our African history which in turn props up those pseudo-science nazi arguments. Alot of those coons have self hate issues! They are ashamed or hate their true Niger-Congo stock of African history, and instead champion Hamitic Africans. That is a centuries old Psuedo science pre-nazi mindset. These Nazis and coons are trying to resurrect these old debunked theories subtly with genetics, so stay on your toes.
|
|
|
Post by melanitex on Oct 8, 2018 18:00:15 GMT -5
Says who? Other DNA data show substantial African affinity: “Results that are likely reliable are from studies that analyzed short tandem repeats (STRs) from Amarna royal mummies5 (1,300 BC), and of Ramesses III (1,200 BC)6; Ramesses III had the Y chromosome haplogroup E1b1a, an old African lineage7. Our analysis of STRs from Amarna and Ramesside royal mummies with popAffiliator18 based on the same published data5,6 indicates a 41.7% to 93.9% probability of SSA affinities (see Table 1); most of the individuals had a greater probability of affiliation with “SSA” which is not the only way to be “African”- a point worth repeating.”
Asante I was reading through a thread on forumbiodiversity and a poster said to the effect of Ramses III e1b1a is irrelevant because "The best that tells us is that he had at least 1 Central or West African ancestor. Doesn't tell us anything about his overall ancestral affiliation." What would you say to this, he is sort of right since it isn't autosomal DNA. It's kind of like White skinned Berbers carrying E-M81...it's a little misleading if you know what I mean.
|
|
|
Post by asante on Apr 9, 2019 12:14:18 GMT -5
Says who? Other DNA data show substantial African affinity: “Results that are likely reliable are from studies that analyzed short tandem repeats (STRs) from Amarna royal mummies5 (1,300 BC), and of Ramesses III (1,200 BC)6; Ramesses III had the Y chromosome haplogroup E1b1a, an old African lineage7. Our analysis of STRs from Amarna and Ramesside royal mummies with popAffiliator18 based on the same published data5,6 indicates a 41.7% to 93.9% probability of SSA affinities (see Table 1); most of the individuals had a greater probability of affiliation with “SSA” which is not the only way to be “African”- a point worth repeating.”
Asante I was reading through a thread on forumbiodiversity and a poster said to the effect of Ramses III e1b1a is irrelevant because "The best that tells us is that he had at least 1 Central or West African ancestor. Doesn't tell us anything about his overall ancestral affiliation." My apologies for the late reply. The importance that I get from this study, is that now we have "official" proof genetically that the so-called "West African" or "Niger-Congo" speaking group as a whole were apart of the biological make up of ancient Hapi Valley civilization, and particularly Kemet. With that genetic evidence no one can no longer say that our people were not apart of that civilization. The whole notion of "you people don't have anything to do with ancient North African civilizations" that is a favorite trope on those sites has officially been silenced with that finding. Prior to this finding we still have overwhelming anthropological evidence coupled with other forms of genetic evidence (i.e. sickle cell), which proves our existence there. The issue that had arisen however was the demand for modern genetic back up, because some silly people wanted to say that the unique head shape of Niger-Congo speakers (deemed "true Negroid" by some anthropologist) was a superficial relationship. Those people tend to be quiet when I bring up sickle cell however. With the finding of E1b1a in the region now there has to be research done to account for it's presence in dynastic times, as well as an explanation as to how it ended up there. This will present a complete overhaul of Christopher Ehret's narrative of the peopling of ancient Egypt, in which he admits to the Northeast African/Sudanese Nubian origins of Niger-Congo speakers along side Cushitic speakers, but he inexplicably says that rather than migrating "north" into Kemet like the Cushitic speakers that the Niger-Congo speakers (not just the Mande) immediately headed into West Africa 12,000 years ago. This essentially debunks the "Hamitic Hypothesis" that modern proponents of "Afro-Asiatic" support on the low. PS. Question and press ANYBODY who props up Christopher Ehret or Afro-Asiatic languages, because they are likely agents trying to promote that false white supremacist narrative. That's just baseless speculation on their behalf. They have no evidence to suggest that he had any additional non African ancestry. To that I'd just tell to that they have to take what actually came from the study. No other studies on pharonic Kemites has produced anything other than African individuals. Everything else is wishful thinking on their behalf.
|
|