Wlad is not a top 20 HW, he has never beaten anyone of significance

Ok, and I'm telling you that we don't need to look @ Ancient Egyptian art to establish the FACT of their African identity.

Understand?

 

Please stop.

Either we're going to look @ the artwork or we're not.

Which one is it?

 

OK, then you should not have tried to use it as evidence.

In any event, you now have one fewer argument on the table. That should simplify things.

And incidentally: [ame]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Egyptian_technology[/ame]


Very few of the things listed there represent an advance over the stuff the Sumerians exported to the rest of the world. In some cases, like medicine, it's worse.

The Hyksos proved Egypt's technological backwardness when they ended the Middle Kingdom. They conquered Egypt because they had bronze working, domesticated horses, chariots, lamellar armor, wheels, compound recurved bows, swords, and a bunch of other stuff that the Egyptians lacked. After that, Egypt kept abreast of foreign technological developments better. They did not, however, become a beacon of science in the ancient world. The Hittites, Babylonians, and Assyrians did so well against Egypt because the Egyptians still didn't smelt iron very well.

 

Wow, you really are clueless, aren't you?

Did you NOT read the very first sentence?

Adjacent people in the Nile Valley show similarities from the Delta up through Nubia all the way to the Equator?

Do you not comprehend what's being said here?

Now, let's put the above in the correct context;

Do you have anything else because your ship is sinking...

 

Wikipedia is not a credible source.

You will have to do better than that.

 

You already conceded that the art was irrelevant to your argument. Nevertheless, I wanted to put the final nail in the coffin for the sake of thoroughness, just in case you brought it up later.

Carry on.

 

It's about as credible as Encyclopedia Britannica.

More importantly, I'm lazy. Most of the stuff I'm saying is common knowledge among Egyptologists.

I can't prove a negative. If you claim that Egypt was more advanced (or even as advanced) than its neighbors, it's your job to state which technologies it had that its neighbors did not. You have the burden of proof. I can't trawl through the archives to find the stuff that Egypt didn't have.

Finally, I already mentioned several technologies that the Egyptians clearly lacked: until the Hyksos, the Egyptians did not have wheels, bronze working, lamellar armor, compound bows, domesticated horses, chariots, and swords. This backwardness directly lead to their military defeat.

 

No, it's not.

Not my problem.

Then you should have no problems with finding credible sources.

So who asked you to?

Pyramid building technology before anyone else.

Is this even up for debate?

 

Again, the full quote...and are you aware that Brace is a known Afrocentric critic, funny what you are trying to imply with his own words....

:dead


The biological affinities of the ancient Egyptians were tested against their neighbors and selected prehistoric groups as well as against samples representing the major geographic population clusters of the world. Two dozen craniofacial measurements were taken on each individual used. The raw measurements were converted into C scores and used to produce Euclidean distance dendrograms. The measurements were principally of adaptively trivial traits that display patterns of regional similarities based solely on genetic relationships. The Predynastic of Upper Egypt and the Late Dynastic of Lower Egypt are more closely related to each other than to any other population. As a whole, they show ties with the European Neolithic, North Africa, modern Europe, and, more remotely, India, but not at all with sub-Saharan Africa, eastern Asia, Oceania, or the New World. Adjacent people in the Nile valley show similarities in trivial traits in an unbroken series from the delta in the north southward through Nubia and all the way to Somalia at the equator. At the same time, the gradient in skin color and body proportions suggests long-term adaptive response to selective forces appropriate to the latitude where they occur. An assessment of “race” is as useless as it is impossible. Neither clines nor clusters alone suffice to deal with the biological nature of a widely distributed population. Both must be used. We conclude that the Egyptians have been in place since back in the Pleistocene and have been largely unaffected by either invasions or migrations. As others have noted, Egyptians are Egyptians, and they were so in the past as well.

 

Naysayer, who was the first great heavyweight and how did he justify the tag of greatness?

 

Ok. Here is the other quote from Brace that YOU posted which, for some reason, you have now chosen to ignore.

Would you care to address EXACTLY what Brace is saying here?

 

[url]http://news.cnet.com/2100-1038_3-5997332.html[/url]

[url]http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v438/n7070/full/438900a.html[/url]

[url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4530930.stm[/url]

:hey

Not mine either, really. I'm simply telling you that I'm not going to do the research. I remember most of this stuff from reading and speaking to Egyptologists over a pretty long period, and I'm not going to retrieve it all. If you think I'm dodging the question...meh, whatever.

...If I was willing to invest more time in this debate than a few one-liners and a couple minutes on Wikipedia, that would be true. I don't really expect to convince you, but other people reading this who are a lot more invested in "winning" this debate can look this stuff up if they want to.

You did. I said that Egypt didn't have advanced technology compared to its neighbors, and you basically replied "prove it".

It's significantly harder to find proof of the nonexistence of something than its existence. So the onus is on you: can you tell me which technologies the Egyptians had that other countries did not?

Yes, a completely useless "technology" that the Maya, Toltecs, and Aztecs developed independently despite an even lower level of technological sophistication than the Egyptians. Also, the Sumerian ziggurats were fairly comparable, and close enough in time. Plus, the Sumerians weren't centralized, so they achieved their results with a much smaller pool of labor.

 

What does any of this have to do with the Klitschkos?

They have *never* beaten a significant HW.

Sure, they have longevity - and I guess there is some quality in longevity. However, said longevity has come in the weakest of HW eras in the history of the sport.

Getting knocked out by a *38* year old semi-retired pro golfer does NOT make an ATG HW.

 

Brace doesn't dispute Egyptians having "tropical limbs" but is hesistant to define it as an exclusively negro trait, insisting their are more variables be considered. Trivial traits, he calls them. If that confirms their "blackness" in your eyes..you are quite mad.

Also, please explain your double standards for Lewis and Marciano. Again, this is a boxing forum.