Wlad Klitschko vs Lennox Lewis Resume

"Estimates of living stature, based on X-ray measurements applied to the Trotter & Gleser (1958 ) negro equations for the femur, tibia and humerus, have been made for ancient Egyptian kings belonging to the 18th and 19th dynasties. The corresponding equations for whites give values for stature that are unsatisfactorily high. The view that Thutmose III was excessively short is proved to be a myth. It is shown that the limbs of the pharaohs, like those of other Ancient Egyptians, had negroid characteristics, in that the distal segments were relatively long in comparison with the proximal segments. An exception was Ramesses II, who appears to have had short legs below the knees."

--Robins and Schute. The Physical
Proportions and Stature of New
Kingdom Pharaohs," Journal of Human
Evolution 12 (1983), 455-465


EDIT: It should be noted that Tut belongs to the 18th Dynasty and Ramses II belongs to the 19th Dynasty...

 

Thutmose III's body had been ravaged and he was missing his feet. Thus he appeared short.

At any rate:

Feel free to refute, but I'm done sooooon!

[url]http://www.catchpenny.org/race.html[/url]

It is apparent that the ancient Egyptians did not make racial distinctions themselves, but rather ethnic distinctions based on nationality. Tomb paintings depicting captive Nubians may show them as being very dark, but this is an artistic convention stereotyping a nationality, and to conclude there were therefore no very dark Egyptians would be a non sequitur. Similarly, the skin tones in art depicting the Egyptians themselves adhere to convention rather than an absolutely accurate description of reality.

...

It is impossible to categorize these people into the tidy "black" and "white" terms of today's racial distinctions. The Egyptians are better classified using evidence of their language and their material cultures, historical records, and their physical remains because so-called "racial" identification has been elusive, much for the reasons cited above. Skulls have been measured and compared and DNA tests attempted in various forms, but conclusions are few. Skulls are more similar to those found in the Northern Sudan and less similar to those found in West Africa, Palestine, and Turkey. It seems that there has been some genetic continuity from Predynastic time through the Middle Kingdom, after which there was a considerable infiltration into the Nile Valley from outside populations. That the Egyptians by and large were dark is certain, and many must have been what we today call "black."

....

In the 1940's, A. Batrawi made a detailed examination of ancient skeletal material from Egypt and Lower Nubia, comparing such physical features as craniological data and the length of limb bones, while recording changes through time. His resulting theory of racial continuity in the early Egyptian population has been supported by more recent research. In his seminal two-part article "The Racial History of Egypt and Nubia" (The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 75:1945, pp. 81-101; 76:1946, pp. 131-56), Batrawi does categorize physical types into racial groups, but his description of migration and interaction remains valid. He concluded:

Since early neolithic times there existed two distinct but closely related types, a northern in Middle Egypt and a southern in Upper Egypt. The southern Egyptians were distinguished from the northerners by a smaller cranial index, a larger nasal index and greater prognathism. The geographical distinction between the two groups continued during the Pre-Dynastic Period. The Upper Egyptians, however, spread into lower Nubia during that period. By the beginning of the Dynastic era the northern Egyptian type is encountered for the first time in the Thebaïd, i.e., in the southern territory. The incursion, however, seems to have been transitory and the effects of the co-existence of the two types in one locality remained very transient until the 18th Dynasty. From this time onwards the northern type prevailed all over Egypt, as far south as Denderah, till the end of the Roman period.
In Lower Nubia a slight infiltration of negroid influence is observed during the Middle Kingdom times. In the New Empire period, however, the southern Egyptian type prevails again. After the New Empire a fresh and much stronger negro influence becomes discernable till the end of the Roman period.
There is a wide gap in our knowledge of the racial history of the two countries during the Christian and Islamic periods, owing to the lack of an adequate amount of relevant material. The study of the available measurements of the living, however, apparently suggests that the modern population all over Egypt conforms more closely to the southern type. The mean measurements for the modern Nubians are rather curious. The average cephalic index for them is significantly larger than that for the Egyptians. This is contrary to expectation based on knowledge of the characteristics of the ancient populations. No satisfactory explanation could be suggested.
The distribution of blood groups in present-day Egypt shows that the mass of population is very homogeneous and there are no significant differences, in this respect, between the Moslems and the Copts. Comparisons of head and body measurements suggest the same conclusion. [pp. 154-55]
​

 

I have already demonstrated that you don't have a clue as to what you're talking about...

 

We'll here's one more for ya! :good Ah, I think your just bitter because I didn't have to source Nazi ****s to poke holes in your oh so finale conclusion. DENILE IS NOT A RIVER IN EGYPT.

A recent study which performed a histological analysis of the skin on Ancient Egyptian noble mummies from Upper Egypt found it to be, "packed with melanin as expected for specimens of Negroid origin" (see Mekota and Vermehren 2004). Skeletal remains of the Ancient Egyptians have been studied for many years. Their limb proportions have been determined to be tropical suggesting that the ancestors of the Ancient Egyptians migrated from the tropics upon settling the Nile Valley (see Zakrzewski 2004).

Predynastic Egyptian crania at the time of state formation cluster with Northeastern Nilotic, Northwestern Saharan and tropical East Africans (see Keita 1993). There seems to have been a change in craniometric patterns in later periods as Late Dynastic Northern Egyptians have centroid values between African and European series. DNA analysis of 12th Dynasty mummies reveal that they have multiple lines of descent including from Sub-Saharan Africa (see Paabo and Di Rienzo 1993). The other lineages were not identified.



Read more: [url]http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Were_ancient_egyptians_black#ixzz1CBT6Bp4V[/url]

 

Damn are you stupid.

Just ****ing dumb.

Having multiple lines of descent does not exlude the Pharaohs from being Black African.

Obviously they had multiple lines of Black African descent, Genius.

The fact that their skin was "packed with melanin as expected for specimens of Negroid origin" should tell you as much.

It's just too bad that you're too stupid to comprehend that which is PAINFULLY obvious...

 

Wlad could make it through undefeated, but Lennox could've also done that and didn't. Things don't always turn out as they do in fantasy world.

Ramses II had blue eyes, I never met a black African with blue eyes.

 

Even old Gary Mason would have chin-checked WALDO.

Having said that Lewis did duck Sanders and Byrd so it's horses for courses....both fighters picked the most appropriate opposition at the time and both managed to **** it up more than once.

Doesn't matter anyway, Lewis beat VITLAY and judging from the recent Adamek contract that must mean he has beaten WALDO too surely :huh

 

Not sure if Lewis ducked Sanders. Rahman flattened Sanders which basically put him in line for the fight in Sth Africa which of course he won.

If Sanders had beaten Rahman that night, who knows. I never saw Sanders as a real contender that was ducked.

Byrd though? I guess that classes as a duck. I just think at that time of his career Lewis had zero interest in fighting somebody with as little chance of beating him, that would draw not a lot of money. He did have to drop a belt, so yeah, I guess it's a duck.

 

Absolutely. I saw somebody on another thread post something like "It doesn't matter which one he fights, he's fighting one of the two real heavyweight champions anyway.." without any sense at all, that you can't have TWO REAL champions.

You have one REAL champion, or you have none.

 

I was being sarcastic about Sanders and Byrd mate....I just love the fact that the Klit-ites say Lewis ducked them when he actually fought the guy that beat Sanders, and the guy that beat the guy that beat that guy.

Chris Byrd was considered a ****ing JOKE when Lewis was champ, same as Ruiz. Lewis didn't even consideer offers from either of those because he knew they were easy fights that no-one would buy.

A few years later some Klit-ite bright spark says that Lewis ducked Chris Byrd (because that's the best fighter on WALDOS resume) and suddenly all hell breaks loose on that subject. Fact is, Byrd doesn't have a punch which is why both brothers were so keen to pad out their records with the guy. Lewis treated Byrd with the disdain he deserved yet now is getting bashed for not facing him even though anyone with any sense knows it would have been a 1-2 round blowout.

WALDO stops Byrd in a snooze-fest and all his fans say "wow, WALDO did something Lewis never did!!"

Lewis never fought Purrity, Sanders or Brewster either, but none of them ever bring that up for some reason.

 

That's the point. Why the hell has Adamek signed to fight "one of the brothers" that **** doesn't make sense?

So we're supposed to lump the champs together now are we? I'm really confused by this. Does this mean that if Adamek loses to VITLAY or WALDO then by default Haye does too? Or if he wins he beats Haye?

I think I'm starting to see that pathetic point that these ducking ****s are trying to make, but it's a weird one.

 

I think it means if Adamek beats Wlad, he gets Vitaly's belt as well and vice-verse.

 

I thought it was a strange thing to say...

Byrd had no chance against Lewis, and everybody under the sun knew it.

I think at the time it was clear Lewis had one eye on retirement, and I've seen a quote from him at the time that said something like Byrd, Holyfield, Tua were the top 3 on the IBF, so to keep the belt he'd have to smash a midget, or fight 2 guys again he'd just beaten so what was the point?

 

Exactly how do you know that Ramses II eyes were blue?

 

It's right here in this photograph,

This content is protected