Ancient Egyptians - Cultural Origin, genetics, etc.

[Shockley]

Contrary I could say that anyone who seriously asserts that the ancient Egyptians were "Semitic" (assuming you mean Middle Eastern) can't be taken seriously, because the ancient Egyptian language was not a "Semitic" language.

What do you mean 'assuming I mean' Middle Eastern? If you're trying to imply that there is a distinct difference between Jews, Arabs, Assyrians, and most people living in the Middle East and Semitic peoples, you are very mistaken.

As to your language point, ancient Egyptian is classified as a Hamito-Semitic language. This is sometimes rendered as Afroasiatic, depending on the time frame of the article your referencing, but the connection between the groups has always been a well understood facet of linguistics.

Even if the Egyptians didn't speak a Semitic language, that would not mean they weren't a Semitic people. The national language of Ethiopia (Ethiopians being non-Semitic) is Amharic (which is a Semitic language).

 

[Mindfire]

Also, I'm pretty sure "goldseeker" and "Sir Shawn" are the same person. Notice that goldseeker only has one post to his name, and it's in this forum- responding to Sir Shawn. -_- Classy.

 

[Shockley]

Also, I'm pretty sure "goldseeker" and "Sir Shawn" are the same person. Notice that goldseeker only has one post to his name, and it's in this forum- responding to Sir Shawn. -_- Classy.

Ah, good catch.

 

[Sir Shawn]

By your logic, I could skim the writings of Steven Hawking on the internet and become a PhD physicist overnight. I'll take my Nobel Prize now, thanks.

I'm going to assume that you only have a problem with my participation in this thread, because I provide evidence which eliminates this supposite "mystery cloud" on the subject? The facts that many of you are for whatever reason over looking is that I am not just posting "random" quotes from studies. I have provided evidence refuting fallacies that have persisted throughout this thread's life (i.e the "Semitic" affinities of early Lower Egyptians). You are also ignoring the fact that I am putting these sources into "CONTEXT", which should have eliminated this so-called "problem" with my debating tactic.

 

[Sir Shawn]

SMH I don't know who "Goldkeeper" is or whoever. I am not a duplicate account and anyone has any doubts then tell the moderator to check the IP addresses for any of us "suspicious" posters.

 

[grahamguitarman]

Forgive for trying to bring credence to my mere opinion by first giving everyone the words of respected, peer reviewed scholarship. I was not aware that this would offend you. If you'd noticed in between those "cut and paste" I relayed my argument also. It just happened that it correlates perfectly with peer reviewed

No all you have done is cut and paste other peoples words and said "look this person says this, so it must be true!" that is simply spamming other peoples work not contributing your own point of view.

Originally Posted by Steerpike
Some people like to demonstrate their CTRL-C and CTRL-V prowess. it is more interesting, in my view, to discuss the issue and make references to studies than to simply spam the studies to the forum.



This. So much this. This guy's entire 8 post history has been on this one thread. I think it's fairly safe to say that the ONLY reason he came here is to spam the forum with "studies", which are all frankly quite dubious- at BEST. I haven't seen even a single proper citation. In fact, no citations at all, just blocks of text, images, and youtube videos. The only way to see if his information is credible is scour google to find the original source, then read it all, but who has time for that? I don't. He may be "supporting" my side of the discussion (if we have sides here), but he's being an enormous dick about it. I'd rather not have his "help" to be honest.

Absolutely, so far this has been an interesting discussion between writers, who at the end of the day post mostly for the enjoyment of the intelligent chat.

 

[Mindfire]

I'm going to assume that you only have a problem with my participation in this thread, because I provide evidence which eliminates this supposite "mystery cloud" on the subject? The facts that many of you are for whatever reason over looking is that I am not just posting "random" quotes from studies. I have provided evidence refuting fallacies that have persisted throughout this thread's life (i.e the "Semitic" affinities of early Lower Egyptians). You are also ignoring the fact that I am putting these sources into "CONTEXT", which should have eliminated this so-called "problem" with my debating tactic.

If you're going to post "evidence" and "studies", could you cite some of your sources in a professional manner? It could give you some credibility.

 

[Sir Shawn]

As to your language point, ancient Egyptian is classified as a Hamito-Semitic language. This is sometimes rendered as Afroasiatic,

The ancient Egyptian language IS related to Semitic (along with other languages in the family), but that does not make it Semitic. It is distinct!

Even if the Egyptians didn't speak a Semitic language, that would not mean they weren't a Semitic people.

There is no modern biological or cultural evidence indicating that these people were "Semitic". Instead it has been pretty conclusive that they were a mixture of Nilotic and Afrasian Horn Africans (black people) originally. I would suggest that many of you go on youtube and watch the Manchester and Cambridge lectures of the bio-cultural origins of ancient Egypt by S.O.Y. Keita, so that he can break down what these major lines of evidence indicates.

 

[Mindfire]

SMH I don't know who "Goldkeeper" is or whoever. I am not a duplicate account and anyone has any doubts then tell the moderator to check the IP addresses for any of us "suspicious" posters.

Someone call his bluff. PLEASE call his bluff.

 

[Sir Shawn]

If you're going to post "evidence" and "studies", could you cite some of your sources in a professional manner? It could give you some credibility.

EXCUSE ME? Did you not notice that every single quote given was cited down to page number?

 

[Mindfire]

EXCUSE ME? Did you not notice that every single quote given was cited down to page number?

Yeah. Retroactively no doubt. But even so, it doesn't excuse your spamming.

 

[grahamguitarman]

I would suggest that many of you go on youtube and watch the Manchester and Cambridge lectures of the bio-cultural origins of ancient Egypt by S.O.Y. Keita, so that he can break down what these major lines of evidence indicates.

Huh? are you seriously suggesting that people - some of whom who actually work in these fields, go to Youtube to do their research? Are you for real?

 

[Mindfire]

Huh? are you seriously suggesting that people - some of whom who actually work in these fields, go to Youtube to do their research? Are you for real?

Because as we all know, The University of Youtube is at the forefront of respected academia. Right up there with Wikipedia College and Facebook Seminary!

 

[grahamguitarman]

Because as we all know, The University of Youtube is at the forefront of respected academia. Right up there with Wikipedia College and Facebook Seminary!

Ha ha ha priceless

 

[Sir Shawn]

Huh? are you seriously suggesting that people - some of whom who actually work in these fields, go to Youtube to do their research? Are you for real?

Ok let's try this again. Here are part 1 of the lectures at the University of Cambridge:

 

[Sir Shawn]

and Manchester:

about the bio-cultural origins of ancient Egypt, based on consistent MAINSTREAM research. Start with part one and follow on through to part 6 or 7. You all's reaction to these facts are priceless, truly priceless. Nothing but obfuscation and intellectual dishonesty.

 

[grahamguitarman]

I have no intention of watching your videos, why should I? If I want to research a subject I don't just go to a video and listen to an experts personal point of view. I study the evidence for myself and come to my own conclusions. for every expert video you post supporting your argument I could post one saying the opposite. Its called cherry picking, and personally I refuse to play that game.

 

[Mindfire]

You all's reaction to these facts are priceless, truly priceless. Nothing but obfuscation and intellectual dishonesty.

Obfuscation? Dishonesty? Nothing of the kind! I actually agree with the position you're trying to assert. I just object to you being pompous and self-righteous about it. Also the spamming. The spamming needs to stop.

 

[grahamguitarman]

Oh and our objection is not to your 'facts' but to your sledgehammer tactics in trying to railroad everyone into accepting your point of view.

Accusing us all of intellectual dishonesty will not win anyone over to your side, it will just make your invasion of our discussion more unwelcome.

Edit: I also don't think the Egyptians were semitic or white, my personal belief is that they are mixed race of mostly African origins. but I dislike the tactics being used by sir shawn in a community he doesn't even have any intention of being a part of

 

[Legendary Sidekick]

The spamming needs to stop.

Agreed.

~LS