|
Post by Kazakhgirl on Feb 28, 2005 1:24:51 GMT -5
Indeed on photo are Coptic Egyptians, which are also in some extent belong to minority. It is like war of pictures of two minorities, when truth is in beteween.
|
|
|
Post by alexandrian on Feb 28, 2005 1:38:29 GMT -5
Indeed on photo are Coptic Egyptians, which are also in some extent belong to minority. It is like war of pictures of two minorities, when truth is in beteween. Copts may be a minority, but they are still Egyptians just like everyone else. They are certainly not racially or ethnically different from their Muslim compatriots. Some say that Copts are lighter but I don't think the difference between them and Muslims is severe.
|
|
|
Post by zain on Feb 28, 2005 1:41:55 GMT -5
first you clime your own Coptic are the whites Egyptians while obversely they are not . Alexandrian ,what is wrong with you , you are full of selfishness.
|
|
|
Post by Faelcind on Feb 28, 2005 1:42:10 GMT -5
I guess I didn't have to ask her Kazakhgirl myself Dyn seems that your confidence in her opinion was misplaced.
BTW KG welcome to the board, you seem to have put your foot right into the hot water, I think you have been pretty reasonable and made good points personally.
|
|
|
Post by alexandrian on Feb 28, 2005 1:45:59 GMT -5
first you clime your own Coptic are the whites Egyptians while obversely they are not . Alexandrian ,what is wrong with you , you are full of selfishness. What are you talking about? I just said right know that Copts were like all Egyptians while other people were trying to excuse the lightness of the Egyptians I posted by saying that they were Copts and thus were lighter, which I denied. I don't get you at all.
|
|
|
Post by alexandrian on Feb 28, 2005 1:46:55 GMT -5
the picture of the egyptians are Copts... someone toldme that Copts are mixed with syrians... and alexandrian, they do look lighter than the average egyptian... See...zain..here we have someone else who said they were lighter than the average Egyptian, NOT me. Don't put words in my mouth.
|
|
|
Post by zain on Feb 28, 2005 1:51:31 GMT -5
See...zain..here we have someone else who said they were lighter than the average Egyptian, NOT me. Don't put words in my mouth. only in Alexandri ,the rest are like Egyptian,and in the south they look darker .
|
|
|
Post by Kazakhgirl on Feb 28, 2005 1:53:31 GMT -5
So those kids with some Negroid features are also Egyptians "just like everyone else". The point of this thread is about diversity and that it goes both ways. It is pathetic to doubt that people cannot be Egyptians because they exhibit Negroid features (obivous in this case).
Faelcind, that you for greeting. I find this board amusing.
|
|
|
Post by dyn on Feb 28, 2005 1:54:43 GMT -5
What do you mean better? Egyptians with Negroid features exist. They are minority, but it does not mean that they worse then light Egyptians. Noone claims that Egyptians with Negroid features are majority. Speaking Russians. Russians did not have Mongol slaves. They simply could not have them because they were subordinate to Mongols/Kypchaks for a long long time, longer then Bulgarians were under Turks. Facial reconstruction of Russian tzars such as Andrei Bogoljubski, whos mother was Kypchak only proves that Russian did mix with Mongoloid nations from Caspyan on highest levels. They also have Uralic admixture. Many Uralic and Altaic nations just dissolved in Russians. Siberian Tartars assimilated with Russians and were literally engulfed. According to Coon, Ladogans have noticable Mongoloid features, which are not skin and eye color, but rather brahicephaly, nose bridge, cheek bones, etc. it is about again cranofacial features, not skin. Prince Trubezkoi wrote a book 1920 about Turanian (Mongoloid subgroup) influence on Russian anthropology. He classified nations, which mixed with Russians. some of Russian aristocracy were Tartar and Kypchak descent. Famous Russian aristocracy: Derzhavins-tatar murza Bagrim, Prince Urusov-from tatar prince Edygei (Ghengizkchans bloodline), Apraksin-Tartar aristocratic ansectry, Chaadaev, Aksakov, etc. The aristocracy was the only segment of the population that had the opportunity to mix with "exotic" foreigners but that had practically nothing to do with common Russians ie 95% of the total population. And the Eurasian fantasies of some Russians are not to be brought up as serious scholarship. Some Finno-Ugric groups were absorbed by Russians to varying degrees but they were overwhelmingly Caucasoid in the first place. Siberian Tatars, Altaics etc had practically nothing to do with most of the ethnic Russian population.
|
|
|
Post by alexandrian on Feb 28, 2005 1:57:07 GMT -5
only in Alexandri ,the rest are like Egyptian,and in the south they look darker . How do you know the ones in the picture are Alexandrian? My point was to show that there are a lot of examples where Egyptians are significantly lighter and more Caucasian than Yemenis. My point was obviously proven well by your reaction and dyn's reaction, or lack thereof.
|
|
|
Post by dyn on Feb 28, 2005 2:19:51 GMT -5
Oh come on. There is no proof that Bin laden is of Afro-Arab caste, its just an inference. He doesn't have many Negroid features. Also, that thing about there being so many "non-Arabs in Arab states". What are the chances that the majority of the Saudi hijackers are not gonna be native Saudi? Are you going to dismiss every dark-skinned Saudi as a foreigner? You are unbelievable. By the way, Egyptians in Saudi Arabia have a much harder time standing out then Pakis or Filipinos or Indians or even Yemenis, so that says something. By the way, what did you think of the Egyptian/Yemeni contrast I posted above? I don't have any reason not to believe zain about this and from what I've read about Muhammad bin Laden, it seems to add up. Bin Laden's father was from the Hadramaut region, where there is a high level of non-Caucasoid admixture. So even if he wasn't of an Afro-Arab caste, he probably wouldn't have been a pure Arab. There is a distinction between the highland tribes and the rest of the population in Yemen. You posted a picture of black African descended people in the coastal regions of Yemen.
|
|
|
Post by Kazakhgirl on Feb 28, 2005 2:20:37 GMT -5
I don't have Eurasian fantasies. I'm down to earth. Actually i'm completely against Eurasian theories, they all politicized crap. It is just fact that Russian extensively interracted with Mongoloid nations on all levels.
Simpleton Russians had all opportunity in the world to mix with Mongols during the time Mongols expanded to the West, led by grandson of Cheghiz-Batu. Do you think his humangous army were having affairs with aristocrats only? Mongols affected all nations on their way from Pakistan to Poland.
In case with Siberian Tartar they simply dissapeared in Russian nation (became Russian), and many other small nations, not only Mongoloid ones, but such as Livons, Veps, Volga region nations. Russia is versatile and to deny it is unreasonable.
Uralics, especially from Volga region are border line Caucasians, when such Ugrians as Samoyeds (who completely assimilated with Russians already) and Voguls are Mongoloid. Their nasal bridge and brahicephaly are the first things to notice.
What's the point? to show how pure one nation is? There is nothing pure in this world.
|
|
|
Post by dyn on Feb 28, 2005 2:27:46 GMT -5
I believe genetic tests of a large sample of ethnic Russians proved that Russians on average have about 13% Asian admixture. That's still a minority and I'm sure Dyn's going to have a heart attack when he reads this, but it's not bad to have Asian ancestry, and again, Russians are a Caucasoid people of mainly Slavic origin, just with some Uralic admixture. All right, what genetic studies, for God's sake? Because the ones I've seen indicated nowhere near that much.
|
|
|
Post by Kazakhgirl on Feb 28, 2005 2:35:31 GMT -5
Genetic studies of TAT C (Mongoloid genetic marker, it is also called Asian marker) frequency in nations. The higher the frequency of marker the more mongoloid this nation is or had Mongoloid ancestors. Yakuts's Tat-C is 80-88% (don't remember exact percentage).
P.S. For example Saami in Finland have highest frequncy of TatC (55%) when Saami in Norway have only 8%.
PS. There is very good magazin, which is called Russian journal of Genetics. It is published by Maik Nauka Interperiodika and it publishes extensive projects and articles on genetics, conducted by Russian Academy of Science, Russian state Universities, institutes of Experimental Biology . It has narrow more medical/scientific specialization but quite readible. You can also contact author scientists personaly and ask questions via e-mail. They do not focus only on origin of humans etc., but deaseases and other things.
|
|
|
Post by zain on Feb 28, 2005 2:41:46 GMT -5
i don’t believe in compering 18milions Yemeni to 70milions Egyptians ,for sure you would have more white people that Yemen, but for some reason hidden in your heart you choice to ignore that Yemen also had the same condition as Egyptians, the afro-arabin like the one in the picture above, you are like those ani-Arabian who which to push us to sub-Sahara if the can . don’t forget we are all middeastren in average ,an average Yemeni still will fit in lebanon , Iraq and Syria , but Afro-arabin will have a hard time just like the nubian .
|
|