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

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

God your boxing history is so ****, I have no idea why i've been wasting my time on you.

Please remind me next time that you have no clue about anything you say.

The list of boxers who've been at the top of the division as long as wlad has is very very small.

Call it a product of the era if you wish but then which era was weakest prior to 06 and was that era's champion shunned from being great?

 

This is BLATANTLY false.

The Hyksos only conquered the Delta region.

 

I thought we weren't going to look @ artwork?

Did I misunderstand you?

 

I think you two are overcomplicating this.

It doesn't matter whether the Egyptians originally came from the Sudan, Australia, or Mars. For the sake of argument, we'll say you're right: they came from the Sudan.

There. That doesn't change anything, because the source you're discussing says that modern Egyptians look pretty much the same as ancient Egyptians. They're the same regardless of where the ancient Egyptians came from. So the only question becomes: do you consider the modern Egyptians black?

If so, great. If not, great.

(Incidentally, the Copts probably look closer to the ancient Egyptians than any other group. But I digress).

 

I am joking.

 

Rhetorical flourish. You needn't take everything so literally.

If you do want to be literal, though, Egypt ceased to exist as a unified political entity when the Hyksos came in. The Theban dynasty that ultimately kicked them out became their vassals for a while, so you could fairly call the Hyksos the rulers of Egypt during that time.

 

Exactly, he can't argue that so he's breaking it down line by line, trying to make it look like a man regarded as an Afrocentric critic is aruging they are black.

I really wish he would address his contradictions regarding fighters of different skin color. That is more troubling than his opinion of what an Ancient People may have possibly looked like.

 

Anyway, a few points seem to have been buried in the last few pages. Nobody seems to have contradicted them. I'll assume that everybody's conceded these until I'm told otherwise:

1) Many civilizations with Egypt's level of technological advancement (or lower) have built large pyramids. It's not as hard as it sounds.

2) The Hyksos -- regardless of whether they took over the Nile Delta or the whole thing -- thoroughly thrashed the Egyptians thanks to VASTLY superior military technology.

3) Superior military technology is a lot more practical than pyramids.

4) Nefertiti looked exactly like Wladimir Klitschko, and was clearly of Ukrainian descent.

 

I say we switch the topic and discuss the ancient Sumarians.

 

I fail to see the relevance of the ancient Sumerians to a thread that's so clearly about boxing.

 

So, you think there is only ONE credible source on Ancient Egypt?

Not hardly.

[url]http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2009/04/quotations-from-ancient-egypt-and-nile.html[/url]

Gentlemen, it's been nice playing with you but Game Over...

 

Obviously not. But you were arguing using Mongoose's source to try to prove something that the source didn't support.

You are free to use other sources to show that it's wrong. You weren't doing that.

Good. Another source. And Mongoose will reply with his sources, and you will counter-reply with your own, and...

Not really "game over", then, is it?

Anyway, it's all irrelevant. Even if you do prove what you hope to prove, the Evil Conspiracy To Refute Afrocentrism (tm) can just reply that the Egyptians never did anything that great anyway.

 

Yes, it's also not impressive that Egypt's neighbors were not able to duplicate the feat.

Advanced weaponry more practical, yes. Technologically more impressive than the Great Pyramid. Not even close.

Try again...

 

Fact remains, Hyksos only conquered the tail end of Egypt, not the whole of the country - and were later kicked out...