trajan
Junior Member
Posts: 68
|
Post by trajan on Jul 1, 2004 14:40:02 GMT -5
In the German version of Baker's "Races" he cites Sergi who claimed that the bulk of Egypt's population are ethiopids . (on page 365)
Do you think the bulk of Egyptians are Ethiopids ?I am no expert but I doubt it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Melnorme on Jul 1, 2004 14:41:44 GMT -5
In the German version of Baker's "Races" he cites Sergi who claimed that the bulk of Egypt's population are ethiopids . (on page 365) Do you think the bulk of Egyptians are Ethiopids ?I am no expert but I doubt it. Unless he has a weird definition of 'Ethiopid' then, no. |
|
trajan
Junior Member
Posts: 68
|
Post by trajan on Jul 5, 2004 1:51:16 GMT -5
How large is the negrid or ethiopid component in today's Egypt if there is any ?
|
|
|
|
Post by nevada85 on Jul 5, 2004 6:06:45 GMT -5
Usually the main populations of northern african countries are situated at the very shores of meditterranean so the desert acts as a buffer zone against a possible negrid flow. People with visible sub saharan admixture in north african countries are mostly mixed with invading stock of very southern arabs. In the case of egypt because of the nile delta providing settlement deep inside the desert its a whole different story. I dont have statistics but there is a very visible negrid component in egypt.
|
|
|
|
Post by rutgers on Jul 6, 2004 20:13:31 GMT -5
I beg to differ. OUtside of Aswan, the Ethiopid element is not that visible. It is there, but it does not reflect a sizeable minority.
|
|
|
|
Post by Said Mohammad on Jul 8, 2004 12:00:51 GMT -5
Usually the main populations of northern african countries are situated at the very shores of meditterranean so the desert acts as a buffer zone against a possible negrid flow. People with visible sub saharan admixture in north african countries are mostly mixed with invading stock of very southern arabs. In the case of egypt because of the nile delta providing settlement deep inside the desert its a whole different story. I dont have statistics but there is a very visible negrid component in egypt. This is totally not true, the desert was never a buffer zone to so-called "Negrid" flow, please show evidence. How is it that southern Arabs can invade sub-Saharan Africa going south but "Negrid" could not have invaded going up north? The Sahara was not always there and there was geneflow both ways. |
|
|
|
Post by Said Mohammad on Jul 8, 2004 12:02:58 GMT -5
I beg to differ. OUtside of Aswan, the Ethiopid element is not that visible. It is there, but it does not reflect a sizeable minority. Upper egypt outside of Aswan has mass amounts of people who are tropical African and or tropical African admixed. Luxor, Dakhleh Oasis, and Kharga Oasis all have people there who have a phenotype showing a cline towards tropical Africans. |
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on Jul 8, 2004 12:32:02 GMT -5
Said, you are pissing into the wind. No-one believes you or your negrocentric world view.
|
|
|
|
Post by Said Mohammad on Jul 8, 2004 18:29:38 GMT -5
Said, you are pissing into the wind. No-one believes you or your negrocentric world view. Unles your dumbass posts some proof instead of being a whinny bitch, f*ck off you wannabe Semite |
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on Jul 10, 2004 13:06:58 GMT -5
I speak a Semitic language which is classified as being an Arabic derivative. That sounds Semitic to me, humanzee. So your argument about the origin of the Semitic-Hamitic family is up your tree, isn't it? If I, a white skinned UP type European speaks a Semitic language and I come from Europe then Semitic languages developed, using your "deductive" skills, in Europe. Nothing to do with white, black or brown Africa or the Asian side of the Mediterranean. Your Greenmountain is up your tree probably playing pocket billiards with you. My linguistic hypothesis is just as valid as Mr. G and yours, humanzee. Remember to use a condom.
|
|
|
|
Post by Said Mohammad on Jul 10, 2004 13:34:52 GMT -5
I speak a Semitic language which is classified as being an Arabic derivative. That sounds Semitic to me, humanzee. So your argument about the origin of the Semitic-Hamitic family is up your tree, isn't it? If I, a white skinned UP type European speaks a Semitic language and I come from Europe then Semitic languages developed, using your "deductive" skills, in Europe. Nothing to do with white, black or brown Africa or the Asian side of the Mediterranean. Your Greenmountain is up your tree probably playing pocket billiards with you. My linguistic hypothesis is just as valid as Mr. G and yours, humanzee. Remember to use a condom. And Ethiopians spoke Semitic languages long before West Asians so what is your point bastard child of a prostitute? Your language is an Arab derivative meaning it originally wasn't spoken in Europe you bitch. The evidence is well established that Afrasian languages arose in Africa and race has nothing to do with this dumbass. If you can't accept the fact that the language you speak came from within sub-Saharan Africa(Afrasian languages) thats not my problem shitty boy. No f*ck off and save your mother from the brothel. |
|
|
|
Post by deuceswild on Jul 10, 2004 15:11:46 GMT -5
Well..this forum is turning out to be more entertaining that I thought. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on Jul 11, 2004 9:01:12 GMT -5
Some Ethiopians only speak Semitic languages because they have had a long and serious relationship with Arabians lasting many hundreds of years, close as in f*cking distance, got it, homohumanzee.
The only thing that has come out of negro Africa is diseases like AIDS, which you probably have being buggered without a condom as you do. Sleeping sickness, Ebola-Marburg......that is what negro Africa have given the world. Semitic/Hamitic languages are caucasian and as about as negro African as Inuit, Mongolian and Tiwi. Go decorate someone's home homohumanzee.
|
|
