The problem with Juan Manuel Marquez....

KnuckleUp99 · Nov 9, 2011

SILENCER said: ↑

no ****

as for your hero dr keita:

it can be imagined that the modern diversity to be found in Egypt. in terms of craniofacial features skin colour what have you, would likely have been very similar to that found in the past.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZssWb4MmGM&feature=player_embedded#!

even he disagrees with you.
Click to expand...

Nay Sayer....:-( Do you like removing ALL doubt about how simple you really are but continuing on? I mean..... by all means go on... this **** is hysterical.... but at your own expense. I almost feel bad for you.

Nay_Sayer · Nov 9, 2011

Gained said: ↑

Quoting afrocentric sources and wysinger is laughable. I suggest you read hard and good
Click to expand...

Hey Genius, LEARN HOW TO READ. I've been quoting Etu's sources.

pejevan · Nov 9, 2011

There is no problem with Jaun Manuel Marquez!!!!!

What the fact is wrong with boxing fans?

JMM fought hard and went out of his shield to make the fight exciting.

Imagine if he would do a Molsey? Then there is something wrong with Juan Manuel Marquez.....

Mad respect for the whiner and whinger.

Nay_Sayer · Nov 9, 2011

Gained and KnuckleHead99,

I'll deal with you idiots soon enough. Be patient and wait till I'm done with the so-called "archaeologist".

While you're waiting, get your arguments together. Random cut-n-paste jobs and youtube videos AIN'T gonna cut it. Prove that you have more than half of a braincell...

KnuckleUp99 · Nov 9, 2011

Nay_Sayer said: ↑

Gained and KnuckleHead99,

I'll deal with you idiots soon enough. Be patient and wait till I'm done with the so-called "archaeologist".

While you're waiting, get your arguments together. Random cut-n-paste jobs and youtube videos AIN'T gonna cut it. Prove that you have more than half of a braincell...
Click to expand...

AHAHA! You got you're hands full scrambling to come back with any half ass'd response on a topic you "try" really hard to act knowledgeable on.:rofl You don't wanna bite off more than you can chew kid. Baby steps...... And next time, try speaking on something you can actually hold a semi decent debate on. If you come sideways you will quickly get your skirt pull up.:good

thanosone · Nov 9, 2011

Wtf is this other bull**** in this thread? **** Ancient Egypt and its negroids or whatever the ****.

bballchump11 · Nov 9, 2011

damn what's going on in here

Gonzarelli · Nov 9, 2011

MAG1965 said: ↑

funny thing about this fight is the Pacman fights are Marquez claim to fame. If he loses easily to Pacman, it does affect his legacy. This fight is not just another fight for Marquez, but it is to Pacman.
Click to expand...

Ironically, Pac would not be in the position he is in had the cards gone JMM's way(rightfully so).

PAC "...this(JMM 3) is my most important fight"

Knives7 · Nov 9, 2011

Nay_Sayer said: ↑

The problem with Marquez, as I see it, is that he allows Pacquiao to goad him into a brawl where Pacquiao then has the advantage.

Anyone who thinks it's going to be a blowout for Pacquiao is delusional...
Click to expand...

Wrong. It's not that he allows Pacquiao. He can't help but fight a brawl with Pacquiao.

Nay_Sayer · Nov 10, 2011

Etu86 said: ↑

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

Click to expand...

Ironically, the earliest certain images of the white crown come not from Egypt but from Qustul in Lower Nubia, about 300 km up-river from Hierakonpolis. These images occur on two incense burners of uniquely Nubian type, which depict kings seated in archaic high-prowed boats wearing abnormally tall crowns with knobs, accompanied by bulls and Horus falcons (Williams 1980; 1986, pls. 33, 34). They date to about 3300 BC. The same crown then appears not long afterwards in Egypt: on an unprovenienced ivory knife handle in the Metropolitian Museum and, later still, on the Scorpion mace head and Narmer palette (Wilkinson 1999, 194–5). The evidence can be interpreted several ways:

a) the white crown was exclusively Egyptian, and it is Egyptian kings who are represented on the Qustul incense burners;

b) the white crown was used simultaneously by competing rulers in Upper Egypt and Lower Nubia; or

c) the white crown was first used in Nubia and spread northwards.

It was obviously associated with riverine kingship (kings in boats), bulls (the Min cult) and the god Horus. The white crown is usually assumed to be a homegrown Egyptian symbol—badge of the kings of the emergent Upper Egyptian state. They obviously pushed the red-crown wearers into Lower Egypt before the advent of the dynastic era. We need at least to consider the possibility, however, that the white crown might have had a Nubian origin. Varying forms of the shrine of Min, showing their similarities to the red and white crowns. When Egypt conquered the A-Group rulers of Qustul, they may simply have adopted their crown, just as they adopted the red crown to legitimize their claims to the north. This may explain why Ta-Seti (Lower Nubia), from the beginning of dynastic history, was Egypt’s first nome (Baines & Malek 1986, 15).

It may seem surprising, but there is a strong ancient tradition linking the white crown to Upper Nubia. In the first century BC, Diodorus Siculus (3.2.1–3.6) wrote that at the beginning of time the Egyptians and Nubians (‘Aithiopians&#8217 were one people and that Osiris (i.e. their first king) came from ‘Aithiopia’ and colonized Egypt after it was created by the out-flowing Nile. This, he states, explains why Nubian and Egyptian customs are similar and why the kings of both countries wear ‘tall pointed felt hats ending in a knob’ (Eide et al. 1996, 645).

Genesis of the Pharaohs: Genesis of the ‘Ka’ and Crowns?, by Timothy Kendall, American Archaeologist (2010)

http://wysinger.homestead.com/crown.html

Click to expand...

FACT: The earliest representation of the White Crown is NUBIAN, not Egyptian.

Nay_Sayer · Nov 10, 2011

SILENCER said: ↑

you conveniently neglected to mention this sentence leading up to your quote:

'This may also be the result of Nubian mercenaries being
included in the sample from Gebelein.'

it then goes onto put the samples in context (something naysayer again neglected to do) and finishes with:

'Together with the known presence of Nubian mercenaries
in Gebelein (Fischer, 1961), the MK sample
may represent a Nubian rather than Egyptian population'.

now watch him try and twist the wording with a touch of afrocentrist ******ation and use this as proof that egyptians were in fact nubians after all

you are about as useful as a pulled tooth naysayer! etu doesn't need to de-mean himself and answer that reply from you, even i with my untrained eye can clearly see your agenda and word play! that was easy....

Click to expand...

WTF are you talking about, Genius? Why not quote the WHOLE of the section in question instead of one or two sentences taken OUT OF CONTEXT. Here is the whole section IN CONTEXT:

Body shape

Stature is comprised of contributions from several body portions, i.e., from the lower limb and from the trunk and cranium. The analyses performed on each individual bone were undertaken to see whether the small stature change found could be assigned to differences in growth of either the lower limb or the trunk (employing upper limb measurements as an indirect proxy for trunk size). Both upper and lower limb measurements (individual long bone lengths) exhibited significant change through time, although neither upper limb length (humerus radius) nor lower limb length (femur tibia) themselves exhibited significant change through time. All long bone lengths that changed display the same trend of increasing in length up until the start of the Dynastic period, and then decrease to the MK. None of the body ratios separating upper and lower portions exhibit statistically significant change through time. This pattern supports suggestions that the relative constancy of stature (i.e., the relatively low level of change through time) cannot easily be compartmentalized. This result is in agreement with previous research that found no significant change in body proportions between the Predynastic period and the Middle Kingdom (Masali, 1972; Robins, 1983).

The ancient Egyptians have been described as having a “Negroid” body plan (Robins, 1983). Variations in the proximal to distal segments of each limb were therefore examined. Of the ratios considered, only maximum humerus length to maximum ulna length (XLH/XLU) showed statistically significant change through time. This change was a relative decrease in the length of the humerus as compared with the ulna, suggesting the development of an increasingly African body plan with time. This may also be the result of Nubian mercenaries being included in the sample from Gebelein.

The nature of the body plan was also investigated by comparing the intermembral, brachial, and crural indices for these samples with values obtained from the literature. No significant differences were found in either index through time for either sex. The raw values in Table 6 suggest that Egyptians had the “super-Negroid” body plan described by Robins (1983). The values for the brachial and crural indices show that the distal segments of each limb are longer relative to the proximal segments than in many “African” populations (data from Aiello and Dean, 1990). This pattern is supported by Figure 7 (a plot of population mean femoral and tibial lengths; data from Ruff, 1994), which indicates that the Egyptians generally have tropical body plans. Of the Egyptian samples, only the Badarian and Early Dynastic period populations have shorter tibiae than predicted from femoral length. Despite these differences, all samples lie relatively clustered together as compared to the other populations.

Variation in Ancient Egyptian Stature and Body Proportions, Sonia R. Zakrzewski

http://wysinger.homestead.com/egyptian_body_proportions.pdf
Click to expand...

Do yourself a favor and LEARN HOW TO READ.

Nay_Sayer · Nov 10, 2011

Gained said: ↑

EGYPTIAN WRITINGS: THE TWELFTH DYNASTY

EGYPTIAN RACIAL WRITINGS: THE EIGHTEENTH DYNASTY (1580-1350 BC)
Click to expand...

You're kidding, right?

Where are you idiots getting these cut-n-paste jobs? Stormfront?

You idiots are going to have to do better with your citations - like, for instance, providing a SOURCE.

Source please for these and all other citations or STFU.

TMalik · Nov 10, 2011

Googling this: "EGYPTIAN WRITINGS: THE TWELFTH DYNASTY"

Produced this: http://content.yudu.com/Library/A1i24m/MarchoftheTitans/resources/1.htm

Nay_Sayer · Nov 10, 2011

TMalik said: ↑

Googling this: "EGYPTIAN WRITINGS: THE TWELFTH DYNASTY"

Produced this: http://content.yudu.com/Library/A1i24m/MarchoftheTitans/resources/1.htm
Click to expand...

Lol.

Probably where these idiots are getting their citations from.

Nay_Sayer · Nov 10, 2011

Gained said: ↑

"Around 39,000–52,000 years ago, the western Asian branch spread radially, bringing Caucasians to North Africa "Maca-Meyer, et al. 2001(Molak; 2008 )
Click to expand...

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

Here's another history lesson for you, 40 thousand years ago there were NO CAUCASIANS anywhere on earth.

Researchers have disagreed for decades about an issue that is only skin-deep: How quickly did the first modern humans who swept into Europe acquire pale skin? Now a new report on the evolution of a gene for skin color suggests that Europeans lightened up quite recently, perhaps only 6000 to 12,000 years ago. This contradicts a long-standing hypothesis that modern humans in Europe grew paler about 40,000 years ago, as soon as they migrated into northern latitudes. Under darker skies, pale skin absorbs more sunlight than dark skin, allowing ultraviolet rays to produce more vitamin D for bone growth and calcium absorption. “The [evolution of] light skin occurred long after the arrival of modern humans in Europe,” molecular anthropologist Heather Norton of the University of Arizona, Tucson, said in her talk.

Using variations in the gene that did not cause paling, she calculated the background mutation rate of SLC24A5 and thereby determined that 18,000 years had passed since the light-skin allele was fixed in Europeans. But the error margins were large, so she also analyzed variation in the DNA flanking the gene. She found that Europeans with the allele had a “striking lack of diversity” in this flanking DNA—a sign of very recent genetic change, because not enough time has passed for new mutations to arise. The data suggest that the selective sweep occurred 5300 to 6000 years ago, but given the imprecision of method, the real date could be as far back as 12,000 years ago, Norton said. She added that other, unknown, genes probably also cause paling in Europeans.

Either way, the implication is that our European ancestors were brown-skinned for tens of thousands of years—a suggestion made 30 years ago by Stanford University geneticist L. Luca Cavalli-Sforza. He argued that the early immigrants to Europe, who were hunter-gatherers, herders, and fishers, survived on ready-made sources of vitamin D in their diet. But when farming spread in the past 6000 years, he argued, Europeans had fewer sources of vitamin D in their food and needed to absorb more sunlight to produce the vitamin in their skin. Cultural factors such as heavier clothing might also have favored increased absorption of sunlight on the few exposed areas of skin, such as hands and faces, says paleoanthropologist Nina Jablonski of PSU in State College.

Such recent changes in skin color show that humans are still evolving, says molecular anthropologist Henry Harpending of the University of Utah, Salt Lake City: “We have all tacitly assumed for years that modern humans showed up 45,000 years ago and have not changed much since, while this and other work shows that we continue to change, often at a very fast rate.”

European Skin Turned Pale Only Recently, Gene Suggests - AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGISTS (April 2007)

http://galsatia.files.wordpress.com/2007/04/blanche_paleur.pdf
Click to expand...

Gained said: ↑

Dahkleh is in SW Egypt yet no arrival of negroids until “Roman times.” This firmly suggests that negroids in Egypt are of more populace now than prior to Roman times.
Click to expand...

Gained said: ↑

"Indigenous North Africans are genetically quite distinct from sub-Saharan Africans (1), and this difference is reflected in their lighter skin and European/Middle Eastern physical features." Science 6 2007:Vol. 316. no. 5821, pp. 50 - 53

Click to expand...

Third, cave art in the Sahara shows that in Neolithic times (around 5000 B.C.), the population of the Sahara was still of sub-Saharan African ancestry (see figure), whereas "Europoid" figures documenting the arrival of west Eurasians appear later in the cave art record (3).Science 6 2007:Vol. 316. no. 5821, pp. 50 - 53
Click to expand...

Note: The Sahara Desert is IN North Africa.

The nature of the body plan was also investigated by comparing the intermembral, brachial, and crural indices for these samples with values obtained from the literature. No significant differences were found in either index through time for either sex. The raw values in Table 6 suggest that Egyptians had the “super-Negroid” body plan described by Robins (1983). The values for the brachial and crural indices show that the distal segments of each limb are longer relative to the proximal segments than in many “African” populations (data from Aiello and Dean, 1990). This pattern is supported by Figure 7 (a plot of population mean femoral and tibial lengths; data from Ruff, 1994), which indicates that the Egyptians generally have tropical body plans. Of the Egyptian samples, only the Badarian and Early Dynastic period populations have shorter tibiae than predicted from femoral length. Despite these differences, all samples lie relatively clustered together as compared to the other populations.

Variation in Ancient Egyptian Stature and Body Proportions, Sonia R. Zakrzewski

This content is protected

Click to expand...

Gained said: ↑

A HpaI site at np 3592 (3594T/C) separates most Africans from all non-African populations" Kivisild 2000 - 3592. This marker was subsequently found at very high frequencies in mtDNAs of other sub-Saharan African populations (Scozzari et al. 1988, 1994; Soodyall and Jenkins 1992, 1993; Chen et al. 1995) but was not observed in populations of non-African origin.
Click to expand...

Exactly what does this have to do with Ancient Egypt?

Log in or Sign up

The problem with Juan Manuel Marquez....

KnuckleUp99 Boxing Junkie Full Member

Nay_Sayer On Rick James Status banned Full Member

pejevan inmate No. 1363917 Full Member

Nay_Sayer On Rick James Status banned Full Member

KnuckleUp99 Boxing Junkie Full Member

thanosone Love Your Brother Man Full Member

bballchump11 2011 Poster of the Year Full Member

Gonzarelli Boxing Junkie Full Member

Knives7 Boxing Addict banned

Nay_Sayer On Rick James Status banned Full Member

Nay_Sayer On Rick James Status banned Full Member

Nay_Sayer On Rick James Status banned Full Member

TMalik Member Full Member

Nay_Sayer On Rick James Status banned Full Member

Nay_Sayer On Rick James Status banned Full Member

Log in or Sign up

Forums

The problem with Juan Manuel Marquez....

KnuckleUp99 Boxing Junkie Full Member

Nay_Sayer On Rick James Status banned Full Member

pejevan inmate No. 1363917 Full Member

Nay_Sayer On Rick James Status banned Full Member

KnuckleUp99 Boxing Junkie Full Member

thanosone Love Your Brother Man Full Member

bballchump11 2011 Poster of the Year Full Member

Gonzarelli Boxing Junkie Full Member

Knives7 Boxing Addict banned

Nay_Sayer On Rick James Status banned Full Member

Nay_Sayer On Rick James Status banned Full Member

Nay_Sayer On Rick James Status banned Full Member

TMalik Member Full Member

Nay_Sayer On Rick James Status banned Full Member

Nay_Sayer On Rick James Status banned Full Member