# The ancient Egyptians were blacks!



## historycisalpin

ancient Egyptian DNA:

Ramesses III

In December 2012, a genetic study conducted by the same researchers who decoded King Tutankhamun's DNA found that Ramesses III, second pharaoh of the Twentieth Dynasty of Egypt and considered to be the last great New Kingdom regent to wield any substantial authority over Egypt, belonged to Y-DNA haplogroup E-V38. (saharasian)

In 2013, Nature announced the publication of the first genetic study utilizing next-generation sequencing to ascertain the ancestral lineage of an Ancient Egyptian individual. The research was led by Carsten Pusch of the University of Tübingen in Germany and Rabab Khairat, who released their findings in the Journal of Applied Genetics. DNA was extracted from the heads of five Egyptian mummies that were housed at the institution. All the specimens were dated between 806 BC and 124 AD, a timeframe corresponding with the late Dynastic and Greek Ptolemaic Kingdom periods. The researchers observed that one of the mummified individuals likely belonged to the mtDNA haplogroup I2 (saharasian)

In 2015, genome sequencing of a 4,500-year-old skeleton from the Mota Cave in the highlands of southwest Ethiopia suggested that Middle Eastern farmers had migrated into Africa around three thousand years ago, bringing new crops to the continent such as wheat, barley and lentils. Mota was assigned to MtDNA haplogroup L3x2a and Y-DNA haplogroup E-P2 (saharasian).

Modern DNA:

Luis et al. (2004) found that the male haplogroups in a sample of 147 Egyptians were E1b1b (36.1%, predominantly E-M78), J (32.0%), G (8.8%), T(8.2%), and R (7.5%). E1b1b and its subclades are characteristic of some Afro-Asiatic speakers and are believed to have originated in either the Middle East, North Africa, or the Horn of Africa. Cruciani et al. (2007) suggests that E-M78, E1b1b predominant subclade in Egypt, originated in "Northeastern Africa", which in the study refers specifically to Egypt and Libya.

DNA history of Egypt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The settlements on the Nile or the Tigris-Euphrates, as the portions more humid highlands of the Levant, Anatolia and Iran were invaded and conquered by peoples who had abandoned Arabia and / or Central Asia continuously drying up.

  Demeo.

  The people of ancient Egypt came in part from the Arabian Peninsula, in part by central asia territories and partly from Africa itself (not insignificant).

------------

"Africa antiquity, from which he was 'always something new'. These conceptions survived through the centuries after the first teachings of historians of classical Greece. The latter had stated that 'the land of the Blacks' had created the civilization of 'Egypt of the Pharaohs, and Egypt, in turn, had fostered the birth of Greek civilization: in short, says Herodotus in 450 BC, "the names of almost all the gods came to Greece from Egypt." this view was widely accepted by Europeans until the early nineteenth century, more precisely until 1830, when it was suddenly replaced by the emergence of imperialist ideology on the hierarchy of races, in which the Blacks were placed in a lower level and even subhuman.

-----------

The Egyptology has proved a more difficult partner. The Egypt of the Pharaohs was considered as belonging to Africa? So far the problem had almost never place and, despite the testimony of ancient Greek authors, such as Diodorus, Egyptologists were generally given a dry negative answer: or Pharaonic Egypt had evolved within the its original spirit, or had derived from the cultures of Mesopotamia .. "

Africanismo in "Enciclopedia delle scienze sociali"


----------



## TNHarley

Humans breath air!
Sorry, couldn't resist


----------



## irosie91

The DNA  studies do not indicate that the ancient Egyptians were "BLACK"---or green or blue or white and pink


----------



## Meathead

Ramases III's DNA findings are something like someone in the future finding Obama's DNA and concluding the founding fathers were of African ancestory.

Talk to Asclips. He eats this stuff up and spews it. It's funnier when he does it though.


----------



## historycisalpin

irosie91 said:


> The DNA  studies do not indicate that the ancient Egyptians were "BLACK"---or green or blue or white and pink



were certainly not European or proto European


----------



## historycisalpin

Meathead said:


> Ramases III's DNA findings are something like someone in the future finding Obama's DNA and concluding the founding fathers were of African ancestory.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In fact it is known that the blond, white skin of blue eyes, were typical characteristics of those populations ..
Click to expand...


what a fool he was Herodotus!


----------



## irosie91

historycisalpin said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The DNA  studies do not indicate that the ancient Egyptians were "BLACK"---or green or blue or white and pink
> 
> 
> 
> 
> were certainly not European or proto European
Click to expand...


so?      race is a fake in humans


----------



## Wyatt earp

historycisalpin said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The DNA  studies do not indicate that the ancient Egyptians were "BLACK"---or green or blue or white and pink
> 
> 
> 
> 
> were certainly not European or proto European
Click to expand...


----------



## historycisalpin

irosie91 said:


> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The DNA  studies do not indicate that the ancient Egyptians were "BLACK"---or green or blue or white and pink
> 
> 
> 
> 
> were certainly not European or proto European
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> so?      race is a fake in humans
Click to expand...


In fact I do not believe in racial superiority, but in the different ethnic groups that form the human population of the earth.


----------



## 1stRambo

historycisalpin said:


> ancient Egyptian DNA:
> 
> Ramesses III
> 
> In December 2012, a genetic study conducted by the same researchers who decoded King Tutankhamun's DNA found that Ramesses III, second pharaoh of the Twentieth Dynasty of Egypt and considered to be the last great New Kingdom regent to wield any substantial authority over Egypt, belonged to Y-DNA haplogroup E-V38. (saharasian)
> 
> In 2013, Nature announced the publication of the first genetic study utilizing next-generation sequencing to ascertain the ancestral lineage of an Ancient Egyptian individual. The research was led by Carsten Pusch of the University of Tübingen in Germany and Rabab Khairat, who released their findings in the Journal of Applied Genetics. DNA was extracted from the heads of five Egyptian mummies that were housed at the institution. All the specimens were dated between 806 BC and 124 AD, a timeframe corresponding with the late Dynastic and Greek Ptolemaic Kingdom periods. The researchers observed that one of the mummified individuals likely belonged to the mtDNA haplogroup I2 (saharasian)
> 
> In 2015, genome sequencing of a 4,500-year-old skeleton from the Mota Cave in the highlands of southwest Ethiopia suggested that Middle Eastern farmers had migrated into Africa around three thousand years ago, bringing new crops to the continent such as wheat, barley and lentils. Mota was assigned to MtDNA haplogroup L3x2a and Y-DNA haplogroup E-P2 (saharasian).
> 
> Modern DNA:
> 
> Luis et al. (2004) found that the male haplogroups in a sample of 147 Egyptians were E1b1b (36.1%, predominantly E-M78), J (32.0%), G (8.8%), T(8.2%), and R (7.5%). E1b1b and its subclades are characteristic of some Afro-Asiatic speakers and are believed to have originated in either the Middle East, North Africa, or the Horn of Africa. Cruciani et al. (2007) suggests that E-M78, E1b1b predominant subclade in Egypt, originated in "Northeastern Africa", which in the study refers specifically to Egypt and Libya.
> 
> DNA history of Egypt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> The settlements on the Nile or the Tigris-Euphrates, as the portions more humid highlands of the Levant, Anatolia and Iran were invaded and conquered by peoples who had abandoned Arabia and / or Central Asia continuously drying up.
> 
> Demeo.
> 
> The people of ancient Egypt came in part from the Arabian Peninsula, in part by central asia territories and partly from Africa itself (not insignificant).
> 
> ------------
> 
> "Africa antiquity, from which he was 'always something new'. These conceptions survived through the centuries after the first teachings of historians of classical Greece. The latter had stated that 'the land of the Blacks' had created the civilization of 'Egypt of the Pharaohs, and Egypt, in turn, had fostered the birth of Greek civilization: in short, says Herodotus in 450 BC, "the names of almost all the gods came to Greece from Egypt." this view was widely accepted by Europeans until the early nineteenth century, more precisely until 1830, when it was suddenly replaced by the emergence of imperialist ideology on the hierarchy of races, in which the Blacks were placed in a lower level and even subhuman.
> 
> -----------
> 
> The Egyptology has proved a more difficult partner. The Egypt of the Pharaohs was considered as belonging to Africa? So far the problem had almost never place and, despite the testimony of ancient Greek authors, such as Diodorus, Egyptologists were generally given a dry negative answer: or Pharaonic Egypt had evolved within the its original spirit, or had derived from the cultures of Mesopotamia .. "
> 
> Africanismo in "Enciclopedia delle scienze sociali"



Yo, didn`t you mean to say? """The Slaves Of The Sun""" The  Israelite slaves were said to have made the Pyramids, with some made by Black slaves, but History is not exactly clear? Read article below:

The Myths Blacks Believe: The Ancient Egyptians Were Negroes and Built the Grand Pyramids

"GTP"


----------



## historycisalpin

1stRambo said:


> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ancient Egyptian DNA:
> 
> Ramesses III
> 
> In December 2012, a genetic study conducted by the same researchers who decoded King Tutankhamun's DNA found that Ramesses III, second pharaoh of the Twentieth Dynasty of Egypt and considered to be the last great New Kingdom regent to wield any substantial authority over Egypt, belonged to Y-DNA haplogroup E-V38. (saharasian)
> 
> In 2013, Nature announced the publication of the first genetic study utilizing next-generation sequencing to ascertain the ancestral lineage of an Ancient Egyptian individual. The research was led by Carsten Pusch of the University of Tübingen in Germany and Rabab Khairat, who released their findings in the Journal of Applied Genetics. DNA was extracted from the heads of five Egyptian mummies that were housed at the institution. All the specimens were dated between 806 BC and 124 AD, a timeframe corresponding with the late Dynastic and Greek Ptolemaic Kingdom periods. The researchers observed that one of the mummified individuals likely belonged to the mtDNA haplogroup I2 (saharasian)
> 
> In 2015, genome sequencing of a 4,500-year-old skeleton from the Mota Cave in the highlands of southwest Ethiopia suggested that Middle Eastern farmers had migrated into Africa around three thousand years ago, bringing new crops to the continent such as wheat, barley and lentils. Mota was assigned to MtDNA haplogroup L3x2a and Y-DNA haplogroup E-P2 (saharasian).
> 
> Modern DNA:
> 
> Luis et al. (2004) found that the male haplogroups in a sample of 147 Egyptians were E1b1b (36.1%, predominantly E-M78), J (32.0%), G (8.8%), T(8.2%), and R (7.5%). E1b1b and its subclades are characteristic of some Afro-Asiatic speakers and are believed to have originated in either the Middle East, North Africa, or the Horn of Africa. Cruciani et al. (2007) suggests that E-M78, E1b1b predominant subclade in Egypt, originated in "Northeastern Africa", which in the study refers specifically to Egypt and Libya.
> 
> DNA history of Egypt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> The settlements on the Nile or the Tigris-Euphrates, as the portions more humid highlands of the Levant, Anatolia and Iran were invaded and conquered by peoples who had abandoned Arabia and / or Central Asia continuously drying up.
> 
> Demeo.
> 
> The people of ancient Egypt came in part from the Arabian Peninsula, in part by central asia territories and partly from Africa itself (not insignificant).
> 
> ------------
> 
> "Africa antiquity, from which he was 'always something new'. These conceptions survived through the centuries after the first teachings of historians of classical Greece. The latter had stated that 'the land of the Blacks' had created the civilization of 'Egypt of the Pharaohs, and Egypt, in turn, had fostered the birth of Greek civilization: in short, says Herodotus in 450 BC, "the names of almost all the gods came to Greece from Egypt." this view was widely accepted by Europeans until the early nineteenth century, more precisely until 1830, when it was suddenly replaced by the emergence of imperialist ideology on the hierarchy of races, in which the Blacks were placed in a lower level and even subhuman.
> 
> -----------
> 
> The Egyptology has proved a more difficult partner. The Egypt of the Pharaohs was considered as belonging to Africa? So far the problem had almost never place and, despite the testimony of ancient Greek authors, such as Diodorus, Egyptologists were generally given a dry negative answer: or Pharaonic Egypt had evolved within the its original spirit, or had derived from the cultures of Mesopotamia .. "
> 
> Africanismo in "Enciclopedia delle scienze sociali"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yo, didn`t you mean to say? """The Slaves Of The Sun""" The  Israelite slaves were said to have made the Pyramids, with some made by Black slaves, but History is not exactly clear? Read article below:
> 
> The Myths Blacks Believe: The Ancient Egyptians Were Negroes and Built the Grand Pyramids
> 
> "GTP"
> View attachment 76534
Click to expand...


The fact is that the "" civilization "" Egyptian was the result of Mesopotamian / Semitic and African blacks strains.

Eurocentric racist theories are based precisely on a mysterious paternity of certain Aryan civilization, something that has never been true. So much so that most of the Greeks of the classical period had a Africanist conception on the origins of Egyptian "civilization", but also of their.


----------



## historycisalpin

As it regards the peoples Dravidian to India, the Telluric Indus Valley civilization, It was exclusively colonized by Mesopotamian peoples belonging to the strain Semitic / Arabic.

Indian Mesopotamian strain / Arabic:






Mesopotamian populations - Saharasian the Arabian strain:











Natives - telluric India:


----------



## historycisalpin

The ancient Egyptians did not have the europoidal features like these:


----------



## Meathead

If you're trying to convince people that sub-Saharans build the pyramids, forget it. No one claims they were fair-haired Swedes, but they were Mediterranean peoples indigenous to the area. Black genes filtered in down the conduit of the Nile. Jews were not the only slaves the Egyptians had.


----------



## historycisalpin

Meathead said:


> If you're trying to convince people that sub-Saharans build the pyramids, forget it. No one claims they were fair-haired Swedes, but they were Mediterranean peoples indigenous to the area. Black genes filtered in down the conduit of the Nile. Jews were not the only slaves the Egyptians had.



Look at the so-called "Mediterranean peoples" are nothing more than an ethnic extension of the Mesopotamian peoples, of Semitic strain (both Hebrew and Arabic)
The Phoenicians were Semites, the same from which the Greeks learned much of their culture.

P.S.

are Cisalpin, although I live in the north of the Italian peninsula, know very well the Mediterranean peoples of the Old South


----------



## Meathead

historycisalpin said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you're trying to convince people that sub-Saharans build the pyramids, forget it. No one claims they were fair-haired Swedes, but they were Mediterranean peoples indigenous to the area. Black genes filtered in down the conduit of the Nile. Jews were not the only slaves the Egyptians had.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look at the so-called "Mediterranean peoples" are nothing more than an ethnic extension of the Mesopotamian peoples, of Semitic strain (both Hebrew and Arabic)
> The Phoenicians were Semites, the same from which the Greeks learned much of their culture.
> 
> P.S.
> 
> are Cisalpin, although I live in the north of the Italian peninsula, know very well the Mediterranean peoples of the Old South
Click to expand...

What is your point? No one doubts that Greeks, Phoenicians and all the peoples of the Mediterranean are a mix of of strains, but there was little ground to label them as black in the sense of sub-Saharans as you did in your title.

Btw, I have lived in Greece for 22 years and am a Greek citizen through my Greek mother.


----------



## irosie91

historycisalpin said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you're trying to convince people that sub-Saharans build the pyramids, forget it. No one claims they were fair-haired Swedes, but they were Mediterranean peoples indigenous to the area. Black genes filtered in down the conduit of the Nile. Jews were not the only slaves the Egyptians had.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look at the so-called "Mediterranean peoples" are nothing more than an ethnic extension of the Mesopotamian peoples, of Semitic strain (both Hebrew and Arabic)
> The Phoenicians were Semites, the same from which the Greeks learned much of their culture.
> 
> P.S.
> 
> are Cisalpin, although I live in the north of the Italian peninsula, know very well the Mediterranean peoples of the Old South
Click to expand...


semitic-----SO?      somehow some jerks have decided that  "semitic"   means  "arab"   and   "black"


----------



## irosie91

LOL   "learned much of their culture"-----nope-----greeks learned quite a bit from Egyptians who were not arabs or even semites


----------



## irosie91

historycisalpin said:


> As it regards the peoples Dravidian to India, the Telluric Indus Valley civilization, It was exclusively colonized by Mesopotamian peoples belonging to the strain Semitic / Arabic.
> 
> Indian Mesopotamian strain / Arabic:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mesopotamian populations - Saharasian the Arabian strain:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Natives - telluric India:




ROFLMAO     "Mesopotamian -----in the mind of maniac means  "ARAB"  ""


----------



## historycisalpin

In the Po Valley (for example), it is very present this strain Mesopotamian allochthonous. This strain comes from both the north of Europe, from the Iberian peninsula, but its origin always rhyme anyway Mesopotamia.


----------



## historycisalpin

Meathead said:


> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you're trying to convince people that sub-Saharans build the pyramids, forget it. No one claims they were fair-haired Swedes, but they were Mediterranean peoples indigenous to the area. Black genes filtered in down the conduit of the Nile. Jews were not the only slaves the Egyptians had.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look at the so-called "Mediterranean peoples" are nothing more than an ethnic extension of the Mesopotamian peoples, of Semitic strain (both Hebrew and Arabic)
> The Phoenicians were Semites, the same from which the Greeks learned much of their culture.
> 
> P.S.
> 
> are Cisalpin, although I live in the north of the Italian peninsula, know very well the Mediterranean peoples of the Old South
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What is your point? No one doubts that Greeks, Phoenicians and all the peoples of the Mediterranean are a mix of of strains, but there was little ground to label them as black in the sense of sub-Saharans as you did in your title.
> 
> Btw, I have lived in Greece for 22 years and am a Greek citizen through my Greek mother.
Click to expand...


There is a slight difference between the ancient Greeks and the modern Greeks.
Throughout its long history the Greece was also strongly Slavs


----------



## irosie91

historycisalpin said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you're trying to convince people that sub-Saharans build the pyramids, forget it. No one claims they were fair-haired Swedes, but they were Mediterranean peoples indigenous to the area. Black genes filtered in down the conduit of the Nile. Jews were not the only slaves the Egyptians had.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look at the so-called "Mediterranean peoples" are nothing more than an ethnic extension of the Mesopotamian peoples, of Semitic strain (both Hebrew and Arabic)
> The Phoenicians were Semites, the same from which the Greeks learned much of their culture.
> 
> P.S.
> 
> are Cisalpin, although I live in the north of the Italian peninsula, know very well the Mediterranean peoples of the Old South
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What is your point? No one doubts that Greeks, Phoenicians and all the peoples of the Mediterranean are a mix of of strains, but there was little ground to label them as black in the sense of sub-Saharans as you did in your title.
> 
> Btw, I have lived in Greece for 22 years and am a Greek citizen through my Greek mother.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is a slight difference between the ancient Greeks and the modern Greeks.
Click to expand...


not all that much


----------



## irosie91

historycisalpin said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you're trying to convince people that sub-Saharans build the pyramids, forget it. No one claims they were fair-haired Swedes, but they were Mediterranean peoples indigenous to the area. Black genes filtered in down the conduit of the Nile. Jews were not the only slaves the Egyptians had.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look at the so-called "Mediterranean peoples" are nothing more than an ethnic extension of the Mesopotamian peoples, of Semitic strain (both Hebrew and Arabic)
> The Phoenicians were Semites, the same from which the Greeks learned much of their culture.
> 
> P.S.
> 
> are Cisalpin, although I live in the north of the Italian peninsula, know very well the Mediterranean peoples of the Old South
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What is your point? No one doubts that Greeks, Phoenicians and all the peoples of the Mediterranean are a mix of of strains, but there was little ground to label them as black in the sense of sub-Saharans as you did in your title.
> 
> Btw, I have lived in Greece for 22 years and am a Greek citizen through my Greek mother.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is a slight difference between the ancient Greeks and the modern Greeks.
> Throughout its long history the Greece was also strongly Slavs
Click to expand...


chick peas and feta----no change


----------



## miketx

I have heard many takes on ancient Egyptians being black and some of it sound plausible and some not. I don't know, but if they were,


----------



## historycisalpin

irosie91 said:


> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> As it regards the peoples Dravidian to India, the Telluric Indus Valley civilization, It was exclusively colonized by Mesopotamian peoples belonging to the strain Semitic / Arabic.
> 
> Indian Mesopotamian strain / Arabic:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mesopotamian populations - Saharasian the Arabian strain:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Natives - telluric India:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROFLMAO     "Mesopotamian -----in the mind of maniac means  "ARAB"  ""
Click to expand...

For me the real fools are those who believe to the pseudo scientific racist Eurocentric theories, which not only revisits the story as they wish, but they really think that the ancient "civilization" of Saharasia, have an Aryan / europoid paternity.


----------



## miketx

But aren't most folks in Africa black? Or very dark skinned, except the whites down south?


----------



## Meathead

historycisalpin said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you're trying to convince people that sub-Saharans build the pyramids, forget it. No one claims they were fair-haired Swedes, but they were Mediterranean peoples indigenous to the area. Black genes filtered in down the conduit of the Nile. Jews were not the only slaves the Egyptians had.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look at the so-called "Mediterranean peoples" are nothing more than an ethnic extension of the Mesopotamian peoples, of Semitic strain (both Hebrew and Arabic)
> The Phoenicians were Semites, the same from which the Greeks learned much of their culture.
> 
> P.S.
> 
> are Cisalpin, although I live in the north of the Italian peninsula, know very well the Mediterranean peoples of the Old South
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What is your point? No one doubts that Greeks, Phoenicians and all the peoples of the Mediterranean are a mix of of strains, but there was little ground to label them as black in the sense of sub-Saharans as you did in your title.
> 
> Btw, I have lived in Greece for 22 years and am a Greek citizen through my Greek mother.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is a slight difference between the ancient Greeks and the modern Greeks.
> Throughout its long history the Greece was also strongly Slavs
Click to expand...

Now you're getting silly. The Slavs did not appear in the Balkans until 600 AD and were first recorded in history by the Byzantines a millennium after Greece's classical age.

Do you pull this goofy stuff out of your ass?


----------



## historycisalpin

irosie91 said:


> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you're trying to convince people that sub-Saharans build the pyramids, forget it. No one claims they were fair-haired Swedes, but they were Mediterranean peoples indigenous to the area. Black genes filtered in down the conduit of the Nile. Jews were not the only slaves the Egyptians had.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look at the so-called "Mediterranean peoples" are nothing more than an ethnic extension of the Mesopotamian peoples, of Semitic strain (both Hebrew and Arabic)
> The Phoenicians were Semites, the same from which the Greeks learned much of their culture.
> 
> P.S.
> 
> are Cisalpin, although I live in the north of the Italian peninsula, know very well the Mediterranean peoples of the Old South
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What is your point? No one doubts that Greeks, Phoenicians and all the peoples of the Mediterranean are a mix of of strains, but there was little ground to label them as black in the sense of sub-Saharans as you did in your title.
> 
> Btw, I have lived in Greece for 22 years and am a Greek citizen through my Greek mother.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is a slight difference between the ancient Greeks and the modern Greeks.
> Throughout its long history the Greece was also strongly Slavs
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> chick peas and feta----no change
Click to expand...


It would be like saying that today's Tuscans are in principle the direct descendants of the Etruscans, omitting, however, the germanization occurred in the Middle Ages by the Lombards.

ancient Etruscan:
















Do not tell me there Do you see any similarities ??

Anatolian theory of the Etruscans:

Certain Greek and Roman authors saw the presence of the Etruscans in Italy as a "historical problem," since they differed from the other civilizations in the area.

In Greco-Roman mythology, Aeneas (Greek: Αἰνείας, Aineías) was a Trojan hero, the son of prince Anchises and the goddess Venus. His father was also the second cousin of King Priam of Troy. The 
journey of Aeneas from Troy, (led by Venus, his mother) which led to the founding of the city of Rome, is recounted in Virgil's Aeneid, where the historicity of the Aeneas legend is employed to flatter the 
Emperor Augustus. Romulus and Remus, appearing in Roman mythology as the traditional founders of Rome, were of Eastern origin: their grandfather Numitor and his brother Amulius were alleged to be 
descendants of fugitives from Troy.

Herodotus records the legend that the Etruscans (known to the Greeks as Tyrrhenians) came from Lydia in Asia Minor, modern Turkey

This is their story: [...] their king divided the people into two groups, and made them draw lots, so that the one group should remain and the other leave the country; he himself was to be the head of those 
who drew the lot to remain there, and his son, whose name was Tyrrhenus, of those who departed. [...] they came to the Ombrici, where they founded cities and have lived ever since. They no longer called 
themselves Lydians, but Tyrrhenians, after the name of the king's son who had led them there.

The classic scholar Michael Grant commented on this story, writing that it "is based on erroneous etymologies, like many other traditions about the origins of 'fringe' peoples of the Greek world". Grant writes 
there is evidence that the Etruscans themselves spread it to make their trading easier in Asia Minor when many cities in Asia Minor, and the Etruscans themselves, were at war with the Greeks

However, the Greek Historian Dionysius of Halicarnassus objected that the Tyrrhenian (Etruscan) culture and language shared nothing with the Lydian. He stated

For this reason, therefore, I am persuaded that the Pelasgians are a different people from the Tyrrhenians. And I do not believe, either, that the Tyrrhenians were a colony of the Lydians; for they do not use 
the same language as the latter, nor can it be alleged that, though they no longer speak a similar tongue, they still retain some other indications of their mother country. For they neither worship the same 
gods as the Lydians nor make use of similar laws or institutions, but in these very respects they differ more from the Lydians than from the Pelasgians.

Etruscan origins - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## irosie91

not being an idiot------I do not consider DNA hybridization something  IMPURE


----------



## historycisalpin

Meathead said:


> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you're trying to convince people that sub-Saharans build the pyramids, forget it. No one claims they were fair-haired Swedes, but they were Mediterranean peoples indigenous to the area. Black genes filtered in down the conduit of the Nile. Jews were not the only slaves the Egyptians had.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look at the so-called "Mediterranean peoples" are nothing more than an ethnic extension of the Mesopotamian peoples, of Semitic strain (both Hebrew and Arabic)
> The Phoenicians were Semites, the same from which the Greeks learned much of their culture.
> 
> P.S.
> 
> are Cisalpin, although I live in the north of the Italian peninsula, know very well the Mediterranean peoples of the Old South
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What is your point? No one doubts that Greeks, Phoenicians and all the peoples of the Mediterranean are a mix of of strains, but there was little ground to label them as black in the sense of sub-Saharans as you did in your title.
> 
> Btw, I have lived in Greece for 22 years and am a Greek citizen through my Greek mother.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is a slight difference between the ancient Greeks and the modern Greeks.
> Throughout its long history the Greece was also strongly Slavs
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Now you're getting silly. The Slavs did not appear in the Balkans until 600 AD and were first recorded in history by the Byzantines a millennium after Greece's classical age.
> 
> Do you pull this goofy stuff out of your ass?
Click to expand...



I think that the Slavic migrations have changed (not just), the genetic fabric / ethnic base, and that of classical Greece has survived very little, at least on the genetic level:


In Greece there is the small Slavic speaking minority in the north of the country and immediately come to mind the controversy with the Slavic Macedonia (FYROM). The great slave migration from the fifth century A.D. then they modified in much of the Balkans and pushed all the way down in the Peloponnese as can be inferred from the map of the distribution of the Slavic tribes of the time. Looking at the various sources that cover genetic arguments and doing approximate comparisons between the data of the areas of high greek settlement in eastern Sicily, in Anatolia and the Aegean who generally did not suffer the impact of the Slavs, at least not directly, and those of the Greeks continental modern one can deduce that they have absorbed a fair amount of Slavic, which is probably genetically about 10-20% of the Greek population, as suggested by a geneticist in the comments to "FastIBD over 2,257 Europeans", article describing a test which would show a probable Slavic element in the Middle Ages entry. Interesting about the male haplogroup distribution R1a1 that while not a single Slavic character is still at least partly associated with the expansion of those people and achieves high concentrations in northern Greece. In addition to p. 9 of "The Geography of Recent Genetic Ancestry across Europe" commented in another post there is a graph showing a certain genetic relationship of Greece with no remote Slavic countries like Poland that can be easily explained by the medieval migrations. Almost certainly Greece has had some "genetic" shift to the north and away from Anatolia thanks to these migrations, as indeed has happened to all the Balkan peoples. One can say that the Slavs unified and standardized the eastern half of Europe probably also drastically reducing the final impact of the Asian populations migrations as the Huns and Avars.

 The above concerns the Greek people in general. Secondly, another thing to consider is the presence of relatively few number of minorities on Greek territory that has little more than ten million inhabitants. We are the Aromanians who "officially" are few tens of thousands, but it is thought that in reality are about 200,000 counting those who today identify themselves as Greeks or were more or less absorbed recently in the rest of the population. From where originate no one knows, but it is thought that a part comes from further north, from horse to areas of the Danube. At the moment I am not aware that there has been taken to make their genetic tests. To these should be added the Albanian origin of immigrant populations in ancient times that maybe are around two hundred thousand (estimates vary), as Arvaniti which are also found in Attica and tend not to identify themselves as Albanians according to Wikipedia. Often they moved to cities later urbanization of recent decades. Then there are the Muslim minority and Anatolian fled from Turkey in the course of history, both communities in part by not properly Balkan origin.

In overview, adding components historically "Hellenic" no element of the mentioned Slavic minorities absorbed it can be deduced that the resident population in Greece has had considerable external genetic input in the past 15 centuries.

Recently released a study reported by others (1) estimated that for many European countries the percentages of historical mixtures of some importance between two or more different populations I call "reconstructed." It is also estimated when it occurred. I read that aroused some surprise in Greece, where it would have been reported in the media. Attaches a very high percentage, about 37% of the gene pool of modern Greek, a kind of Slavic peoples arrived from the north by mixing around 1054 A.D. You can, but it would mean that the inhabitants of ancient Greece is not much seen what is written above. The paper has been criticized by some commentators for some aspects. To me as to others that value for Greece seems high given that Bulgaria and Romania would receive less than they according to the pie charts. Some people sugerisce to be due to the limited number of people championship with perhaps excessive presence of Northern Greeks. For my part inclined towards a 15-20% of Slavic origin in the Greek population, however, it is an assessment that has little scientific. We'll see what they will say future studies.






Influenza genetica slava (e non) sulla popolazione greca


----------



## Unkotare

FYI, just seeing how much of a Wikipedia page you can paste into a post is not 'scholarship.'


----------



## irosie91

Unkotare said:


> FYI, just seeing how much of a Wikipedia page you can paste into a post is not 'scholarship.'



your JEALOUSY  of  champion copy-paste athletes is PATHETIC----obviously a manifestation of penis envy


----------



## Unkotare

irosie91 said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> FYI, just seeing how much of a Wikipedia page you can paste into a post is not 'scholarship.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> your JEALOUSY  of  champion copy-paste athletes is PATHETIC----obviously a manifestation of penis envy
Click to expand...






"Athletes"? Was copy-n-paste in the ancient Olympic Games?


----------



## irosie91

Unkotare said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> FYI, just seeing how much of a Wikipedia page you can paste into a post is not 'scholarship.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> your JEALOUSY  of  champion copy-paste athletes is PATHETIC----obviously a manifestation of penis envy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Athletes"? Was copy-n-paste in the ancient Olympic Games?
Click to expand...


yes-----what do you think the DISCUS was-----
   a  FLOPPY  ---of course


----------



## Unkotare

irosie91 said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> FYI, just seeing how much of a Wikipedia page you can paste into a post is not 'scholarship.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> your JEALOUSY  of  champion copy-paste athletes is PATHETIC----obviously a manifestation of penis envy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Athletes"? Was copy-n-paste in the ancient Olympic Games?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> yes-----what do you think the DISCUS was-----
> a  FLOPPY  ---of course
Click to expand...



Wow, that IS old.


----------



## historycisalpin

If I have to stay here to list all the books that I read and study that I did, I would not even time because you get bored from the beginning ..


----------



## historycisalpin

Egyptian origins of the Athenians, religious cults - language, sciences, arts and customs of ancient Greece, of Semitic - saharasian origins. 

***Mod Edit***

Provide a link/reference instead of the amount of material you have posted. Plagiarism is not allowed here.


----------



## Yarddog

historycisalpin said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The DNA  studies do not indicate that the ancient Egyptians were "BLACK"---or green or blue or white and pink
> 
> 
> 
> 
> were certainly not European or proto European
Click to expand...



Of course not, they were either Pure Africans from the south of the Nile, or a mix of Africans, mesopotamians, mediteranian peoples, possibly.  But the purity of 'Blackness' if you will,  depends on what time frame your talking about. at what point did people leave Africa,  then migrate back?    Answer is who knows for sure?


----------



## Hossfly

Sounds like them Egyptians are kin to the Appalachian hillbillies of Kentucky, Tennessee and West Virginia. Inbred they be.


----------



## Indeependent

The ancient Egyptians were Black, overly sexually aroused and destroyed by God.
Next...


----------



## Yarddog

Hossfly said:


> Sounds like them Egyptians are kin to the Appalachian hillbillies of Kentucky, Tennessee and West Virginia. Inbred they be.




Yahhh  I got proof of that,


----------



## Unkotare

historycisalpin said:


> If I have to stay here to list all the books that I read and study that I did, I would not even time because you get bored from the beginning ..


----------



## miketx

Indeependent said:


> The ancient Egyptians were Black, overly sexually aroused and destroyed by God.
> Next...



And they used slave labor....


----------



## irosie91

miketx said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> The ancient Egyptians were Black, overly sexually aroused and destroyed by God.
> Next...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And they used slave labor....
Click to expand...


the ancient Egyptians were not blacks-----in fact they enslaved
blacks-------importing them from Nubia which is largely SUDAN today.    Sudan was the major storage place for sub-Saharan slaves-------and controlled by arab traders for Millennia.      ---remember  KHARTOUM???.    Of course---the population of Egypt had lots of sub-Saharan genes---people MIX


----------



## historycisalpin

historycisalpin said:


> Egyptian origins of the Athenians, religious cults - language, sciences, arts and customs of ancient Greece, of Semitic - saharasian origins.
> 
> ***Mod Edit***
> 
> Provide a link/reference instead of the amount of material you have posted. Plagiarism is not allowed here.



Apparently the censorship is, since there is a big difference between plagiarism and retrieve correctly the ancient historical sources.

So much so that it is an accusation to what shameful yours, given that bring historical sources, with attached, the various authors, is quite different from any (real) form of plagiarism.

Post Scriptum:

QUOTE OF HISTORICAL SOURCES NOT 'HOW PLAGIARIZE...

Methodologies to be fascist regime!


----------



## historycisalpin

irosie91 said:


> miketx said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> The ancient Egyptians were Black, overly sexually aroused and destroyed by God.
> Next...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And they used slave labor....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> the ancient Egyptians were not blacks-----in fact they enslaved
> blacks-------importing them from Nubia which is largely SUDAN today.    Sudan was the major storage place for sub-Saharan slaves-------and controlled by arab traders for Millennia.      ---remember  KHARTOUM???.    Of course---the population of Egypt had lots of sub-Saharan genes---people MIX
Click to expand...


The ancient Egyptians mainly belonged to two ethnic groups of saharasian orgin: the Semitic race and the African one, which was certainly not enslaved or put into ethnic subordination conditions.


----------



## irosie91

historycisalpin said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> miketx said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> The ancient Egyptians were Black, overly sexually aroused and destroyed by God.
> Next...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And they used slave labor....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> the ancient Egyptians were not blacks-----in fact they enslaved
> blacks-------importing them from Nubia which is largely SUDAN today.    Sudan was the major storage place for sub-Saharan slaves-------and controlled by arab traders for Millennia.      ---remember  KHARTOUM???.    Of course---the population of Egypt had lots of sub-Saharan genes---people MIX
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The ancient Egyptians mainly belonged to two ethnic groups of saharasian orgin: the Semitic race and the African one, which was certainly not enslaved or put into ethnic subordination conditions.
Click to expand...


the issue under discussion   is skin color.   Semitic is not a skin color----it is a linguistic designation.   Asian and African are not skin colors----they are continents.    Egyptian figurative art clearly reveals  sub-Saharan persons with black skin as slaves.
Historically,  Nubia was a conduit for the supplying of subsahran persons as slaves to Egypt and to Greece and even to Persia


----------



## historycisalpin

irosie91 said:


> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> miketx said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> The ancient Egyptians were Black, overly sexually aroused and destroyed by God.
> Next...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And they used slave labor....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> the ancient Egyptians were not blacks-----in fact they enslaved
> blacks-------importing them from Nubia which is largely SUDAN today.    Sudan was the major storage place for sub-Saharan slaves-------and controlled by arab traders for Millennia.      ---remember  KHARTOUM???.    Of course---the population of Egypt had lots of sub-Saharan genes---people MIX
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The ancient Egyptians mainly belonged to two ethnic groups of saharasian orgin: the Semitic race and the African one, which was certainly not enslaved or put into ethnic subordination conditions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> the issue under discussion   is skin color.   Semitic is not a skin color----it is a linguistic designation.   Asian and African are not skin colors----they are continents.    Egyptian figurative art clearly reveals  sub-Saharan persons with black skin as slaves.
> Historically,  Nubia was a conduit for the supplying of subsahran persons as slaves to Egypt and to Greece and even to Persia
Click to expand...


When I use the term "Saharasian", I refer primarily to the studies of James DeMeo origin of despotic-patriarchal societies, not to be confused with "sub-Saharan", although is also part of the vast territory of Saharasia.
Semite is not just a linguistic designation, as, indeed, it is not even that Caucasian.

Haplogroups majority who were present in ancient Egypt have remained almost unchanged over time, in fact the majority haplogroups that are found still are J (Semitic), and E (originally from Africa).






I link it there, only it's in Italian:

James DeMeo, Scoperte e ricerche sulla Saharasia

I say that in addition to reading the extracts that are found on the net, I also read the book, after purchasing it.


----------



## Meathead

historycisalpin said:


> the issue under discussion   is skin color.   Semitic is not a skin color----it is a linguistic designation.   Asian and African are not skin colors----they are continents.    Egyptian figurative art clearly reveals  sub-Saharan persons with black skin as slaves.
> Historically,  Nubia was a conduit for the supplying of subsahran persons as slaves to Egypt and to Greece and even to Persia



When I use the term "Saharasian", I refer primarily to the studies of James DeMeo origin of despotic-patriarchal societies, not to be confused with "sub-Saharan", although is also part of the vast territory of Saharasia.
Semite is not just a linguistic designation, as, indeed, it is not even that Caucasian.

Haplogroups majority who were present in ancient Egypt have remained almost unchanged over time, in fact the majority haplogroups that are found still are J (Semitic), and E (originally from Africa).






I link it there, only it's in Italian:

James DeMeo, Scoperte e ricerche sulla Saharasia

I say that in addition to reading the extracts that are found on the net, I also read the book, after purchasing it.[/QUOTE]Look at the cover, read it and try to recognize shit when you see it, or worse yet, buy it.


----------



## historycisalpin

Meathead said:


> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> the issue under discussion   is skin color.   Semitic is not a skin color----it is a linguistic designation.   Asian and African are not skin colors----they are continents.    Egyptian figurative art clearly reveals  sub-Saharan persons with black skin as slaves.
> Historically,  Nubia was a conduit for the supplying of subsahran persons as slaves to Egypt and to Greece and even to Persia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When I use the term "Saharasian", I refer primarily to the studies of James DeMeo origin of despotic-patriarchal societies, not to be confused with "sub-Saharan", although is also part of the vast territory of Saharasia.
> Semite is not just a linguistic designation, as, indeed, it is not even that Caucasian.
> 
> Haplogroups majority who were present in ancient Egypt have remained almost unchanged over time, in fact the majority haplogroups that are found still are J (Semitic), and E (originally from Africa).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I link it there, only it's in Italian:
> 
> James DeMeo, Scoperte e ricerche sulla Saharasia
> 
> I say that in addition to reading the extracts that are found on the net, I also read the book, after purchasing it.
Click to expand...

Look at the cover, read it and try to recognize shit when you see it, or worse yet, buy it.[/QUOTE]


Meathead said:


> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> the issue under discussion   is skin color.   Semitic is not a skin color----it is a linguistic designation.   Asian and African are not skin colors----they are continents.    Egyptian figurative art clearly reveals  sub-Saharan persons with black skin as slaves.
> Historically,  Nubia was a conduit for the supplying of subsahran persons as slaves to Egypt and to Greece and even to Persia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When I use the term "Saharasian", I refer primarily to the studies of James DeMeo origin of despotic-patriarchal societies, not to be confused with "sub-Saharan", although is also part of the vast territory of Saharasia.
> Semite is not just a linguistic designation, as, indeed, it is not even that Caucasian.
> 
> Haplogroups majority who were present in ancient Egypt have remained almost unchanged over time, in fact the majority haplogroups that are found still are J (Semitic), and E (originally from Africa).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I link it there, only it's in Italian:
> 
> James DeMeo, Scoperte e ricerche sulla Saharasia
> 
> I say that in addition to reading the extracts that are found on the net, I also read the book, after purchasing it.
Click to expand...

Look at the cover, read it and try to recognize shit when you see it, or worse yet, buy it.[/QUOTE]

Tusche!

Are intellectually mediocre people who judge a book by its cover only


----------



## Picaro

A black warlord conquered most of the Nile, and there were black Pharaohs for 100 or so years, out of thousands. It is hilarious how racists and assorted weirdoes will massively inflate the importance of that minuscule time period.


----------



## historycisalpin

Picaro said:


> A black warlord conquered most of the Nile, and there were black Pharaohs for 100 or so years, out of thousands. It is hilarious how racists and assorted weirdoes will massively inflate the importance of that minuscule time period.



From this point of view I think exactly as Martin Bernal and Giovanni Semerano.


----------



## irosie91

historycisalpin said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> miketx said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> The ancient Egyptians were Black, overly sexually aroused and destroyed by God.
> Next...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And they used slave labor....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> the ancient Egyptians were not blacks-----in fact they enslaved
> blacks-------importing them from Nubia which is largely SUDAN today.    Sudan was the major storage place for sub-Saharan slaves-------and controlled by arab traders for Millennia.      ---remember  KHARTOUM???.    Of course---the population of Egypt had lots of sub-Saharan genes---people MIX
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The ancient Egyptians mainly belonged to two ethnic groups of saharasian orgin: the Semitic race and the African one, which was certainly not enslaved or put into ethnic subordination conditions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> the issue under discussion   is skin color.   Semitic is not a skin color----it is a linguistic designation.   Asian and African are not skin colors----they are continents.    Egyptian figurative art clearly reveals  sub-Saharan persons with black skin as slaves.
> Historically,  Nubia was a conduit for the supplying of subsahran persons as slaves to Egypt and to Greece and even to Persia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When I use the term "Saharasian", I refer primarily to the studies of James DeMeo origin of despotic-patriarchal societies, not to be confused with "sub-Saharan", although is also part of the vast territory of Saharasia.
> Semite is not just a linguistic designation, as, indeed, it is not even that Caucasian.
> 
> Haplogroups majority who were present in ancient Egypt have remained almost unchanged over time, in fact the majority haplogroups that are found still are J (Semitic), and E (originally from Africa).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I link it there, only it's in Italian:
> 
> James DeMeo, Scoperte e ricerche sulla Saharasia
> 
> I say that in addition to reading the extracts that are found on the net, I also read the book, after purchasing it.
Click to expand...


you know absolutely NOTHING about population genetics---feel free to ask.     Semitic is, INDEED, a linguistic designation and has nothing to with the invalid concept of "race"    You got genetic material from ANCIENT EGYPT? -------Egypt was overrun by ARABS long after it was "ANCIENT" and continues to IMPORT black workers------sometimes shooting them in
the head when either they try to escape or try to pass thru.   PS--black is a color-----sometimes Africans originating in sub-Saharan Africa are called  "black"  -----have you ever seen a real chromosome?


----------



## irosie91

Picaro said:


> A black warlord conquered most of the Nile, and there were black Pharaohs for 100 or so years, out of thousands. It is hilarious how racists and assorted weirdoes will massively inflate the importance of that minuscule time period.



correct me if I am wrong-----I think that was a FIERCE Nubian king---------
people have been on the move and in fighting mode since different
groups of apes met at the water-hole  (2001-space odyssey).   
Cleopatra was   "pharaoh"  for a time---she was
actually Assyrian---but of Greek extraction------
-----Elizabeth Taylor was british-----I think.  
King Abdullah ofJordan is NOT entirely Bedouin.  
Prince Philip of England isof uncertain origin-----something about
Greece.    PS----my recent ancestors
hailed from the now defunct  Austrian Hapsburg Empire---
-like  ??MOZART??? ---
a distant cousin of mine is  DATAN----played by
Edward G. Robinson in ---Cecil B DeMille's   "Ten Commandments".    
My skin is very white------utterly unsuited for more than
ten minutes in sunlight


----------



## irosie91

historycisalpin said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> miketx said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> The ancient Egyptians were Black, overly sexually aroused and destroyed by God.
> Next...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And they used slave labor....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> the ancient Egyptians were not blacks-----in fact they enslaved
> blacks-------importing them from Nubia which is largely SUDAN today.    Sudan was the major storage place for sub-Saharan slaves-------and controlled by arab traders for Millennia.      ---remember  KHARTOUM???.    Of course---the population of Egypt had lots of sub-Saharan genes---people MIX
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The ancient Egyptians mainly belonged to two ethnic groups of saharasian orgin: the Semitic race and the African one, which was certainly not enslaved or put into ethnic subordination conditions.
Click to expand...


"ethnic group" is not  RACE or COLOR


----------



## historycisalpin

irosie91 said:


> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> miketx said:
> 
> 
> 
> And they used slave labor....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the ancient Egyptians were not blacks-----in fact they enslaved
> blacks-------importing them from Nubia which is largely SUDAN today.    Sudan was the major storage place for sub-Saharan slaves-------and controlled by arab traders for Millennia.      ---remember  KHARTOUM???.    Of course---the population of Egypt had lots of sub-Saharan genes---people MIX
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The ancient Egyptians mainly belonged to two ethnic groups of saharasian orgin: the Semitic race and the African one, which was certainly not enslaved or put into ethnic subordination conditions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> the issue under discussion   is skin color.   Semitic is not a skin color----it is a linguistic designation.   Asian and African are not skin colors----they are continents.    Egyptian figurative art clearly reveals  sub-Saharan persons with black skin as slaves.
> Historically,  Nubia was a conduit for the supplying of subsahran persons as slaves to Egypt and to Greece and even to Persia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When I use the term "Saharasian", I refer primarily to the studies of James DeMeo origin of despotic-patriarchal societies, not to be confused with "sub-Saharan", although is also part of the vast territory of Saharasia.
> Semite is not just a linguistic designation, as, indeed, it is not even that Caucasian.
> 
> Haplogroups majority who were present in ancient Egypt have remained almost unchanged over time, in fact the majority haplogroups that are found still are J (Semitic), and E (originally from Africa).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I link it there, only it's in Italian:
> 
> James DeMeo, Scoperte e ricerche sulla Saharasia
> 
> I say that in addition to reading the extracts that are found on the net, I also read the book, after purchasing it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you know absolutely NOTHING about population genetics---feel free to ask.     Semitic is, INDEED, a linguistic designation and has nothing to with the invalid concept of "race"    You got genetic material from ANCIENT EGYPT? -------Egypt was overrun by ARABS long after it was "ANCIENT" and continues to IMPORT black workers------sometimes shooting them in
> the head when either they try to escape or try to pass thru.   PS--black is a color-----sometimes Africans originating in sub-Saharan Africa are called  "black"  -----have you ever seen a real chromosome?
Click to expand...


The Semites are an ethnic group of Indo-Mesopotamians-saharasian origin, differ from native europid not only the language, but also for different physical / anthropological.

The skin color mainly depends on the melanin.


----------



## historycisalpin

irosie91 said:


> Picaro said:
> 
> 
> 
> A black warlord conquered most of the Nile, and there were black Pharaohs for 100 or so years, out of thousands. It is hilarious how racists and assorted weirdoes will massively inflate the importance of that minuscule time period.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> correct me if I am wrong-----I think that was a FIERCE Nubian king---------
> people have been on the move and in fighting mode since different
> groups of apes met at the water-hole  (2001-space odyssey).
> Cleopatra was   "pharaoh"  for a time---she was
> actually Assyrian---but of Greek extraction------
> -----Elizabeth Taylor was british-----I think.
> King Abdullah ofJordan is NOT entirely Bedouin.
> Prince Philip of England isof uncertain origin-----something about
> Greece.    PS----my recent ancestors
> hailed from the now defunct  Austrian Hapsburg Empire---
> -like  ??MOZART??? ---
> a distant cousin of mine is  DATAN----played by
> Edward G. Robinson in ---Cecil B DeMille's   "Ten Commandments".
> My skin is very white------utterly unsuited for more than
> ten minutes in sunlight
Click to expand...


Cleopatra was the Semitic, which is quite different from the state that had white origins native europid.

The civilization of Ancient Greece was composed primarily by Caucasians (not europid) and the Semitic (Indo-Mesopotamic).

The Semitic saharasian race, gave a majority contribution to the nascent civilization, not only with regard to the ethnic influences, but also in science, traditions and customs, the arts, language, religious cults, sorting social and more.

Post Scriptum:

It was not even exempt the African strain, since, much of ancient historiography agrees that the Athenians were a colony of Egyptians, mainly African blacks.
The component Nubian and Ethiopian, was of fundamental importance for the Egyptian empire building, not as slaves.


----------



## Picaro

irosie91 said:


> correct me if I am wrong-----I think that was a FIERCE Nubian king---------



Kushite, I think, so yes probably  Nubian; they didn't leave much of a written history behind, at least that have been discovered.



> Cleopatra was   "pharaoh"  for a time---she was
> actually Assyrian---but of Greek extraction------



She was part of the Ptolemaic line, yes; Greek mercenaries who took control some 300 years before Cleo, iirc.



> -----Elizabeth Taylor was british-----I think.



British-American, and converted to Judaism when she married Mike Todd; many think she was born to Jewish family, but that isn't true.



> King Abdullah ofJordan is NOT entirely Bedouin.



Didn't know they were Bedouin at all; the family line goes back a long time; they controlled Mecca, or Medina, I forget which at the moment, for centuries before they cut a deal with the Brits and got paid off with Jordan. They had to  import a population for the place, with some tribes coming in from as far away as the Caucasus Mountain ranges. Don't know how they talked them into moving to a desert, maybe the Russian Commies annoyed them enough to make the move.



> Prince Philip of England isof uncertain origin-----something about
> Greece.



Don't know; I thought they were mostly Germans.



> PS----my recent ancestors
> hailed from the now defunct  Austrian Hapsburg Empire---
> -like  ??MOZART??? ---



Can you play like Mozart?



> a distant cousin of mine is  DATAN----played by
> Edward G. Robinson in ---Cecil B DeMille's   "Ten Commandments".



Do you and your family have Brooklyn accents, too? I crack up every time he has dialogue in that movie.



> My skin is very white------utterly unsuited for more than
> ten minutes in sunlight



Jews I'm aware of have many different skin shades, from Ethiopian to Indian to Celtic coloring, as far as I know, and Spanish as well.


----------



## irosie91

Picaro said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> correct me if I am wrong-----I think that was a FIERCE Nubian king---------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kushite, I think, so yes probably  Nubian; they didn't leave much of a written history behind, at least that have been discovered.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cleopatra was   "pharaoh"  for a time---she was
> actually Assyrian---but of Greek extraction------
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> She was part of the Ptolemaic line, yes; Greek mercenaries who took control some 300 years before Cleo, iirc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Elizabeth Taylor was british-----I think.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> British-American, and converted to Judaism when she married Mike Todd; many think she was born to Jewish family, but that isn't true.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> King Abdullah ofJordan is NOT entirely Bedouin.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Didn't know they were Bedouin at all; the family line goes back a long time; they controlled Mecca, or Medina, I forget which at the moment, for centuries before they cut a deal with the Brits and got paid off with Jordan. They had to  import a population for the place, with some tribes coming in from as far away as the Caucasus Mountain ranges. Don't know how they talked them into moving to a desert, maybe the Russian Commies annoyed them enough to make the move.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Philip of England isof uncertain origin-----something about
> Greece.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Don't know; I thought they were mostly Germans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PS----my recent ancestors
> hailed from the now defunct  Austrian Hapsburg Empire---
> -like  ??MOZART??? ---
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Can you play like Mozart?
> 
> rosie   --well---long long long ago----- I struggled for a
> very very short musical attempt to play  Einekleinenacht-
> music--------on the violin and piano----failed badly
> 
> 
> 
> 
> a distant cousin of mine is  DATAN----played by
> Edward G. Robinson in ---Cecil B DeMille's   "Ten Commandments".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you and your family have Brooklyn accents, too? I crack up every time he has dialogue in that movie.
> 
> YES----Datan is my  fave-----I love it when he says
> "HEY MOSES......."   with a little screed opposing him.
> I did not set foot in Brooklyn till I was about 25---
> not my parents either. ---
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My skin is very white------utterly unsuited for more than
> ten minutes in sunlight
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jews I'm aware of have many different skin shades, from Ethiopian to Indian to Celtic coloring, as far as I know, and Spanish as well.
Click to expand...


     Skin color is a really poor indicator of heritage---very multiallelic-----you cannot tell a past from its skin color


----------



## whitehall

Probably just as "black" as modern Egyptians. You could say the ancient French, at least from the Neanderthal valley region, were hairy.


----------



## kreed

historycisalpin said:


> ancient Egyptian DNA:
> 
> Ramesses III
> 
> In December 2012, a genetic study conducted by the same researchers who decoded King Tutankhamun's DNA found that Ramesses III, second pharaoh of the Twentieth Dynasty of Egypt and considered to be the last great New Kingdom regent to wield any substantial authority over Egypt, belonged to Y-DNA haplogroup E-V38. (saharasian)
> 
> In 2013, Nature announced the publication of the first genetic study utilizing next-generation sequencing to ascertain the ancestral lineage of an Ancient Egyptian individual. The research was led by Carsten Pusch of the University of Tübingen in Germany and Rabab Khairat, who released their findings in the Journal of Applied Genetics. DNA was extracted from the heads of five Egyptian mummies that were housed at the institution. All the specimens were dated between 806 BC and 124 AD, a timeframe corresponding with the late Dynastic and Greek Ptolemaic Kingdom periods. The researchers observed that one of the mummified individuals likely belonged to the mtDNA haplogroup I2 (saharasian)
> 
> In 2015, genome sequencing of a 4,500-year-old skeleton from the Mota Cave in the highlands of southwest Ethiopia suggested that Middle Eastern farmers had migrated into Africa around three thousand years ago, bringing new crops to the continent such as wheat, barley and lentils. Mota was assigned to MtDNA haplogroup L3x2a and Y-DNA haplogroup E-P2 (saharasian).
> 
> Modern DNA:
> 
> Luis et al. (2004) found that the male haplogroups in a sample of 147 Egyptians were E1b1b (36.1%, predominantly E-M78), J (32.0%), G (8.8%), T(8.2%), and R (7.5%). E1b1b and its subclades are characteristic of some Afro-Asiatic speakers and are believed to have originated in either the Middle East, North Africa, or the Horn of Africa. Cruciani et al. (2007) suggests that E-M78, E1b1b predominant subclade in Egypt, originated in "Northeastern Africa", which in the study refers specifically to Egypt and Libya.
> 
> DNA history of Egypt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> The settlements on the Nile or the Tigris-Euphrates, as the portions more humid highlands of the Levant, Anatolia and Iran were invaded and conquered by peoples who had abandoned Arabia and / or Central Asia continuously drying up.
> 
> Demeo.
> 
> The people of ancient Egypt came in part from the Arabian Peninsula, in part by central asia territories and partly from Africa itself (not insignificant).
> 
> ------------
> 
> "Africa antiquity, from which he was 'always something new'. These conceptions survived through the centuries after the first teachings of historians of classical Greece. The latter had stated that 'the land of the Blacks' had created the civilization of 'Egypt of the Pharaohs, and Egypt, in turn, had fostered the birth of Greek civilization: in short, says Herodotus in 450 BC, "the names of almost all the gods came to Greece from Egypt." this view was widely accepted by Europeans until the early nineteenth century, more precisely until 1830, when it was suddenly replaced by the emergence of imperialist ideology on the hierarchy of races, in which the Blacks were placed in a lower level and even subhuman.
> 
> -----------
> 
> The Egyptology has proved a more difficult partner. The Egypt of the Pharaohs was considered as belonging to Africa? So far the problem had almost never place and, despite the testimony of ancient Greek authors, such as Diodorus, Egyptologists were generally given a dry negative answer: or Pharaonic Egypt had evolved within the its original spirit, or had derived from the cultures of Mesopotamia .. "
> 
> Africanismo in "Enciclopedia delle scienze sociali"



  The ancient Egyptians were the same back then as they are now.  Sand negro.  Though there was a time when Egypt was conquered by the negro Nubians.  They ruled Egypt for about 100 years.  More modern Egyptians tried to delete that shameful part of their history.


----------



## historycisalpin

kreed said:


> The ancient Egyptians were the same back then as they are now.  Sand negro.  Though there was a time when Egypt was conquered by the negro Nubians.  They ruled Egypt for about 100 years.  More modern Egyptians tried to delete that shameful part of their history.



The ancient Egyptians were a mixture of Semitic (not europid native) and African, as, indeed, still are.

The strain of African origin, I helped (not just), the formation of the Egyptian civilization, not as slaves.


----------



## historycisalpin

They are all ancient historical sources.

I agree with Martin Bernal when he says that the "civilization" of ancient Greece arose thanks to Egyptian and Phoenician colonies stationed on site. I agree with him even when he says that the ancient Greeks (the classical and Hellenistic period) had a conventional conception, according to which the Greek culture had arisen as a result of colonization around 1500 BC, the Egyptians and Phoenicians, who had colonized the natives.

But even when he says:

"The old model had no major" internal "deficiencies, weaknesses or explanatory power. It was rejected for external reasons. For the eighteenth and nineteenth century romantics and racist at XVIII - XIX all was intolerable that Greece, conceived not only as the epitome of Europe but as his pure childhood, was the result of the mixture between European natives (indigenous europid ???? - I might add) and African and Semitic colonists. the old model had to be rejected and replaced with something more acceptable. "


----------



## Meathead

The Greeks spoke an Indo-European language then as now. Indo-European is a language classification, not racial.

Stupid non-starter on an already stupid thread.

WTF is wrong with you?


----------



## historycisalpin

Meathead said:


> The Greeks spoke an Indo-European language then as now. Indo-European is a language classification, not racial.
> 
> Stupid non-starter on an already stupid thread.
> 
> WTF is wrong with you?



You see that you are not knowledgeable enough, not only regarding the language and the alphabet of the ancient Greeks, but also on the same ancient historiography, that was not pro-European (Eurocentric), but far !!

*The philologist and linguist Giovanni Semerano He considered Indo-European reconstructed by traditional linguists an invented language, without a land without a people he'd spoken and theory hypothesis kept alive because functional ethno racist ideology defined (to other non-European peoples) and social class and caste (within European societies).*

I think the exact same way!

Post Scriptum:

Even the theories of Theo Vennemann are not unwrapped.


----------



## ClosedCaption

Of course they were!  Did you think Egypt was full of sunburned white guys?


----------



## historycisalpin

ClosedCaption said:


> Of course they were!  Did you think Egypt was full of sunburned white guys?



The ancient Egyptians were of African Semitic race.


----------



## Meathead

historycisalpin said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Greeks spoke an Indo-European language then as now. Indo-European is a language classification, not racial.
> 
> Stupid non-starter on an already stupid thread.
> 
> WTF is wrong with you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You see that you are not knowledgeable enough, not only regarding the language and the alphabet of the ancient Greeks, but also on the same ancient historiography, that was not pro-European (Eurocentric), but far !!
> 
> *The philologist and linguist Giovanni Semerano He considered Indo-European reconstructed by traditional linguists an invented language, without a land without a people he'd spoken and theory hypothesis kept alive because functional ethno racist ideology defined (to other non-European peoples) and social class and caste (within European societies).*
> 
> I think the exact same way!
> 
> Post Scriptum:
> 
> Even the theories of Theo Vennemann are not unwrapped.
Click to expand...

Language is not alphabet. If it were, the Turks went from being Arabic speakers to Indo-Europeans essentially overnight and he Vietnamese became Indo-Europeans.

Save that air-head stuff for people with the knowledge and intellect of CC.


----------



## historycisalpin

Meathead said:


> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Greeks spoke an Indo-European language then as now. Indo-European is a language classification, not racial.
> 
> Stupid non-starter on an already stupid thread.
> 
> WTF is wrong with you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You see that you are not knowledgeable enough, not only regarding the language and the alphabet of the ancient Greeks, but also on the same ancient historiography, that was not pro-European (Eurocentric), but far !!
> 
> *The philologist and linguist Giovanni Semerano He considered Indo-European reconstructed by traditional linguists an invented language, without a land without a people he'd spoken and theory hypothesis kept alive because functional ethno racist ideology defined (to other non-European peoples) and social class and caste (within European societies).*
> 
> I think the exact same way!
> 
> Post Scriptum:
> 
> Even the theories of Theo Vennemann are not unwrapped.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Language is not alphabet. If it were, the Turks went from being Arabic speakers to Indo-Europeans essentially overnight and he Vietnamese became Indo-Europeans.
> 
> Save that air-head stuff for people with the knowledge and intellect of CC.
Click to expand...


The oldest languages are those of the Semitic race, as well as the alphabets: you do not know how many words of Latin derived from ancient Semitic voices, but also from the greek.

Obviously the learned nonexistent language Indo-""European"" this do not say never.


----------



## Meathead

historycisalpin said:


> The oldest languages are those of the Semitic race, as well as the alphabets: you do not know how many words of Latin derived from ancient Semitic voices, but also from the greek.
> 
> Obviously the learned nonexistent language Indo-""European"" this do not say never.


Sure. We know what the oldest languages are because we have so much evidence of what people spoke 50,000 to 100,000 years ago. Seriously, WTF is wrong with you?


----------



## whitehall

Why do we need to debate the skin color of ancient Egyptians? Was it just the DNA of Egyptian royalty that was classified as Saharasian or did it include the Phero's subjects as well? Is Saharasian DNA different from subsahara DNA and is it possible that the Jewish slaves who built the pyramids still have some Subsarasian DNA or does it even matter?


----------



## historycisalpin

whitehall said:


> Why do we need to debate the racial component of ancient Egyptians? Is Saharasian DNA different from subsahara DNA or does anyone care?



There are southern African ethnic groups who have a Jewish origin, did you know this ??

Speaking of races and ethnic groups, not necessarily the same as being a racist who believes in the supremacy of the white race.


----------



## historycisalpin

These are the famous patterns of Theo Vennemann:


----------



## irosie91

historycisalpin said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Greeks spoke an Indo-European language then as now. Indo-European is a language classification, not racial.
> 
> Stupid non-starter on an already stupid thread.
> 
> WTF is wrong with you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You see that you are not knowledgeable enough, not only regarding the language and the alphabet of the ancient Greeks, but also on the same ancient historiography, that was not pro-European (Eurocentric), but far !!
> 
> *The philologist and linguist Giovanni Semerano He considered Indo-European reconstructed by traditional linguists an invented language, without a land without a people he'd spoken and theory hypothesis kept alive because functional ethno racist ideology defined (to other non-European peoples) and social class and caste (within European societies).*
> 
> I think the exact same way!
> 
> Post Scriptum:
> 
> Even the theories of Theo Vennemann are not unwrapped.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Language is not alphabet. If it were, the Turks went from being Arabic speakers to Indo-Europeans essentially overnight and he Vietnamese became Indo-Europeans.
> 
> Save that air-head stuff for people with the knowledge and intellect of CC.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The oldest languages are those of the Semitic race, as well as the alphabets: you do not know how many words of Latin derived from ancient Semitic voices, but also from the greek.
> 
> Obviously the learned nonexistent language Indo-""European"" this do not say never.
Click to expand...


the oldest indo European language is SANSKRIT


----------



## Meathead

irosie91 said:


> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Greeks spoke an Indo-European language then as now. Indo-European is a language classification, not racial.
> 
> Stupid non-starter on an already stupid thread.
> 
> WTF is wrong with you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You see that you are not knowledgeable enough, not only regarding the language and the alphabet of the ancient Greeks, but also on the same ancient historiography, that was not pro-European (Eurocentric), but far !!
> 
> *The philologist and linguist Giovanni Semerano He considered Indo-European reconstructed by traditional linguists an invented language, without a land without a people he'd spoken and theory hypothesis kept alive because functional ethno racist ideology defined (to other non-European peoples) and social class and caste (within European societies).*
> 
> I think the exact same way!
> 
> Post Scriptum:
> 
> Even the theories of Theo Vennemann are not unwrapped.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Language is not alphabet. If it were, the Turks went from being Arabic speakers to Indo-Europeans essentially overnight and he Vietnamese became Indo-Europeans.
> 
> Save that air-head stuff for people with the knowledge and intellect of CC.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The oldest languages are those of the Semitic race, as well as the alphabets: you do not know how many words of Latin derived from ancient Semitic voices, but also from the greek.
> 
> Obviously the learned nonexistent language Indo-""European"" this do not say never.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> the oldest indo European language is SANSKRIT
Click to expand...

ALPHABET! FFS, AN ALPHABET IS NOT A LANGUAGE!

People spoke before they developed alphabets to symbolize speech. 

Does anybody get this?!


----------



## irosie91

Meathead said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Greeks spoke an Indo-European language then as now. Indo-European is a language classification, not racial.
> 
> Stupid non-starter on an already stupid thread.
> 
> WTF is wrong with you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You see that you are not knowledgeable enough, not only regarding the language and the alphabet of the ancient Greeks, but also on the same ancient historiography, that was not pro-European (Eurocentric), but far !!
> 
> *The philologist and linguist Giovanni Semerano He considered Indo-European reconstructed by traditional linguists an invented language, without a land without a people he'd spoken and theory hypothesis kept alive because functional ethno racist ideology defined (to other non-European peoples) and social class and caste (within European societies).*
> 
> I think the exact same way!
> 
> Post Scriptum:
> 
> Even the theories of Theo Vennemann are not unwrapped.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Language is not alphabet. If it were, the Turks went from being Arabic speakers to Indo-Europeans essentially overnight and he Vietnamese became Indo-Europeans.
> 
> Save that air-head stuff for people with the knowledge and intellect of CC.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The oldest languages are those of the Semitic race, as well as the alphabets: you do not know how many words of Latin derived from ancient Semitic voices, but also from the greek.
> 
> Obviously the learned nonexistent language Indo-""European"" this do not say never.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> the oldest indo European language is SANSKRIT
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ALPHABET! FFS, AN ALPHABET IS NOT A LANGUAGE!
> 
> People spoke before they developed alphabets to symbolize speech.
> 
> Does anybody get this?!
Click to expand...


you made no point-------the human brain ----WORLD WIDE----is so constructed that all  HUMAN BRAINS have the capacity for spoken and even written language.   ----Eventually ALL HUMANS   do elaborate a language---spoken----and then in some ways SYMBOLIZED.      As to evidence of language----old evidence is the written stuff------Sanskrit is the major precursor of INDO EUROPEAN LANGUAGES-----


----------



## whitehall

historycisalpin said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do we need to debate the racial component of ancient Egyptians? Is Saharasian DNA different from subsahara DNA or does anyone care?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There are southern African ethnic groups who have a Jewish origin, did you know this ??
> 
> Speaking of races and ethnic groups, not necessarily the same as being a racist who believes in the supremacy of the white race.
Click to expand...

Why would a simple informed non confrontational post to an historic DNA claim prompt a response about the alleged "supremacy of the white race"? "Gotcha" and I rest my case.


----------



## historycisalpin

Sanskrit is an Indian language (not europoidal) introduced by people of Mesopotamian strain - Semitic (not europid)

There are traces of pre-Columbian America as well languages Semitic (Mesoamarican)..


----------



## historycisalpin

whitehall said:


> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do we need to debate the racial component of ancient Egyptians? Is Saharasian DNA different from subsahara DNA or does anyone care?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There are southern African ethnic groups who have a Jewish origin, did you know this ??
> 
> Speaking of races and ethnic groups, not necessarily the same as being a racist who believes in the supremacy of the white race.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why would a simple informed non confrontational post to an historic DNA claim prompt a response about the alleged "supremacy of the white race"? "Gotcha" and I rest my case.
Click to expand...


I do not believe in any kind of supremacy (white - black - red yellow or green that is), light ???


----------



## historycisalpin

The Aryans are not even originate in Europe, if anything, Afghanistan:

The conception that the Western academic community centers (corporatist and Eurocentric) of Arian peoples, is strongly affected (directly or indirectly) by the Nazi regime, which appropriated unjustly of that period, making it their own, and rewriting history to their liking, but remains a concept totally wrong.

Note that invented the myth of the Indo "European-European" goes hand in hand with the wave of anti-Judaism and the 800 European dell'900.

The Aryans (the real ones), departed from today Afghanistan to expand into today's Iran and neighbors, then a branch of Codest populations invaded Indian Sub Continent, bringing down the Indus Valley civilization, while another part went to Central Asia, southern Siberia and in of Minusinsk region, the Kurgan Culture Andronovo.

Airyanem Vaejah (Airyanəm Vaejah, approximately "expansion of Indo-Aryan peoples," such as Iran) would be the homeland of the first Iranian spoken of Avesta Zoroastrian (Vendidad, Farg. 1) as one of the sixteen lands perfect dell'Ahura Mazda.
According to a Harvard University scholar, Michael Witzel, the Airyanem Vaejah was in the middle of these lands, the center of the plateau Afghan (Around Bamiyan Province).

The first city of Codest populations Aryānām Xšaθra called "Land of the Aryans", located right in Afghanistan.

David Frawley wrote:

"The current archaeological data do not support the existence of a South Asian European invasion at any time in pre protohistoric eras. The Indo-Aryan invasion as Europe academic concept of the 18th and 19th century, reflects the cultural environment of the time. The linguistic data They were used to validate the concept that in turn was used to interpret the archaeological and anthropological data.

In other words, the Vedic literature has been interpreted on the assumption that there had been an invasion Aryan. Then archaeological evidence were interpreted on the same assumptions.
And both interpretations were then used to justify with each other. It is nothing but a tautology, an exercise in circular thinking, it just proves that if you assume something as true, this proves true!

The modern Western academic world is sensitive to criticism for the cultural and social prejudices. For scholars to speak out against this partial interpretation of "Veda" would cause a re-examination of many of these historical hypotheses that do not bear the physical examination. But if scholars Hindu remain silent or passively accept the misinterpretation of their own culture, all this will no doubt continue, but they will have no one to blame except themselves. It is not an issue to be taken lightly, because the way in which a culture is historically defines, creates prospects with which it is perceived in the modern social context and intellectual. Tolerance is not to allow a false view of their culture and religion propagated freely. This and only one to betray themselves.

Such a view is not good culture or archeology but merely cultural imperialism. Western Vedic scholars have achieved in the sphere intellectual, what the British army has done to discredit the political, divide and conquer the Hindus. In short, the compelling reasons for the Aryan invasion theory were neither literary nor archeological but political and religious, which is to say, no culture, but prejudice. such injury may not have been intentional, but so deeply rooted easily blurs political and religious vision and blurs our thinking. "

*Post Scriptum:
*
Critical only that the leading theory of David Frawley is one of a gradual and evolving among the indigenous peoples of the civilization of the Indus valley Vedic astrology, without which there was no invasion, while I support the theory that the civilization of the Indus valley invaded by populations They came from the territories of today's Afghanistan, certainly not from Europe.

Source:

Frawley - Il Mito dell'Invasione Ariana dell'India

*allochthonous Indian Mesopotamian Semitic origin (Various Aryans of India):*
































*Afghan (true Aryans) of the Mesopotamian strain - Semitic Saharasian:




















*
It is clear that there are similarities ethno anthropological and socio-cultural, that unite the true Aryans Afghanistan with their Brother allocated in India. Traits and characteristics that are not European.


----------



## Meathead

irosie91 said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> You see that you are not knowledgeable enough, not only regarding the language and the alphabet of the ancient Greeks, but also on the same ancient historiography, that was not pro-European (Eurocentric), but far !!
> 
> *The philologist and linguist Giovanni Semerano He considered Indo-European reconstructed by traditional linguists an invented language, without a land without a people he'd spoken and theory hypothesis kept alive because functional ethno racist ideology defined (to other non-European peoples) and social class and caste (within European societies).*
> 
> I think the exact same way!
> 
> Post Scriptum:
> 
> Even the theories of Theo Vennemann are not unwrapped.
> 
> 
> 
> Language is not alphabet. If it were, the Turks went from being Arabic speakers to Indo-Europeans essentially overnight and he Vietnamese became Indo-Europeans.
> 
> Save that air-head stuff for people with the knowledge and intellect of CC.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The oldest languages are those of the Semitic race, as well as the alphabets: you do not know how many words of Latin derived from ancient Semitic voices, but also from the greek.
> 
> Obviously the learned nonexistent language Indo-""European"" this do not say never.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> the oldest indo European language is SANSKRIT
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ALPHABET! FFS, AN ALPHABET IS NOT A LANGUAGE!
> 
> People spoke before they developed alphabets to symbolize speech.
> 
> Does anybody get this?!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you made no point-------the human brain ----WORLD WIDE----is so constructed that all  HUMAN BRAINS have the capacity for spoken and even written language.   ----Eventually ALL HUMANS   do elaborate a language---spoken----and then in some ways SYMBOLIZED.      As to evidence of language----old evidence is the written stuff------Sanskrit is the major precursor of INDO EUROPEAN LANGUAGES-----
Click to expand...

Leaving aside that lunatic's rantings, get yourself better informed:

Proto-Indo-European language - Wikipedia

It really is a fascinating topic although much of it is still theory.


----------



## Picaro

Meathead said:


> The Greeks spoke an Indo-European language then as now. Indo-European is a language classification, not racial.
> 
> Stupid non-starter on an already stupid thread.
> 
> WTF is wrong with you?
> 
> Language is not alphabet. If it were, the Turks went from being Arabic speakers to Indo-Europeans essentially overnight and he Vietnamese became Indo-Europeans.
> 
> Save that air-head stuff for people with the knowledge and intellect of CC.



Yes. Phoenician,  archaic Greek and Roman were all derived from Sanskrit. I haven't checked lately but there were some site discoveries in Russia of what were alleged to be the earliest evidence of the Aryans, pre-dating their invasions of India, a ruined 'city', iirc. I haven't heard anything new in a while about that, though.

Origin and Development of Sanskrit

Also of interest:

Ancient Tablet Found: Oldest Readable Writing in Europe

The Linear A and B weren't spoken languages, as far as I can tell. These are older than Hebrew, though there are Canaanite scripts almost as old as the Linear B's; I don't count those as 'Hebrew', though, and Sanskrit is older as well.

Mycenaeans, Greeks, and the 'Sea Peoples' already had a distinctive culture before they ever came in contact with Egypt, and in fact reduced Egypt to a minor power.


----------



## irosie91

Meathead said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> Language is not alphabet. If it were, the Turks went from being Arabic speakers to Indo-Europeans essentially overnight and he Vietnamese became Indo-Europeans.
> 
> Save that air-head stuff for people with the knowledge and intellect of CC.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The oldest languages are those of the Semitic race, as well as the alphabets: you do not know how many words of Latin derived from ancient Semitic voices, but also from the greek.
> 
> Obviously the learned nonexistent language Indo-""European"" this do not say never.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> the oldest indo European language is SANSKRIT
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ALPHABET! FFS, AN ALPHABET IS NOT A LANGUAGE!
> 
> People spoke before they developed alphabets to symbolize speech.
> 
> Does anybody get this?!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you made no point-------the human brain ----WORLD WIDE----is so constructed that all  HUMAN BRAINS have the capacity for spoken and even written language.   ----Eventually ALL HUMANS   do elaborate a language---spoken----and then in some ways SYMBOLIZED.      As to evidence of language----old evidence is the written stuff------Sanskrit is the major precursor of INDO EUROPEAN LANGUAGES-----
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Leaving aside that lunatic's rantings, get yourself better informed:
> 
> Proto-Indo-European language - Wikipedia
> 
> It really is a fascinating topic although much of it is still theory.
Click to expand...


I am -----as to being INFORMED  ---in the  99th percentile-----wikki is not a source


----------



## Meathead

irosie91 said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> The oldest languages are those of the Semitic race, as well as the alphabets: you do not know how many words of Latin derived from ancient Semitic voices, but also from the greek.
> 
> Obviously the learned nonexistent language Indo-""European"" this do not say never.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the oldest indo European language is SANSKRIT
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ALPHABET! FFS, AN ALPHABET IS NOT A LANGUAGE!
> 
> People spoke before they developed alphabets to symbolize speech.
> 
> Does anybody get this?!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you made no point-------the human brain ----WORLD WIDE----is so constructed that all  HUMAN BRAINS have the capacity for spoken and even written language.   ----Eventually ALL HUMANS   do elaborate a language---spoken----and then in some ways SYMBOLIZED.      As to evidence of language----old evidence is the written stuff------Sanskrit is the major precursor of INDO EUROPEAN LANGUAGES-----
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Leaving aside that lunatic's rantings, get yourself better informed:
> 
> Proto-Indo-European language - Wikipedia
> 
> It really is a fascinating topic although much of it is still theory.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am -----as to being INFORMED  ---in the  99th percentile-----wikki is not a source
Click to expand...

If you were well informed you would understand that although Sanskrit is the oldest Indo-European alphabet, it is not in fact the oldest language. As regards wiki, there are links to sources. Your belief in the simplicity that all languages were written is, well, a bit simple minded.


----------



## Picaro

Meathead said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> Language is not alphabet. If it were, the Turks went from being Arabic speakers to Indo-Europeans essentially overnight and he Vietnamese became Indo-Europeans.
> 
> Save that air-head stuff for people with the knowledge and intellect of CC.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The oldest languages are those of the Semitic race, as well as the alphabets: you do not know how many words of Latin derived from ancient Semitic voices, but also from the greek.
> 
> Obviously the learned nonexistent language Indo-""European"" this do not say never.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> the oldest indo European language is SANSKRIT
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ALPHABET! FFS, AN ALPHABET IS NOT A LANGUAGE!
> 
> People spoke before they developed alphabets to symbolize speech.
> 
> Does anybody get this?!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you made no point-------the human brain ----WORLD WIDE----is so constructed that all  HUMAN BRAINS have the capacity for spoken and even written language.   ----Eventually ALL HUMANS   do elaborate a language---spoken----and then in some ways SYMBOLIZED.      As to evidence of language----old evidence is the written stuff------Sanskrit is the major precursor of INDO EUROPEAN LANGUAGES-----
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Leaving aside that lunatic's rantings, get yourself better informed:
> 
> Proto-Indo-European language - Wikipedia
> 
> It really is a fascinating topic although much of it is still theory.
Click to expand...


Written symbols have been around a while; languages like Sanskrit that are both spoken and written are what I would limit the discussion to.


----------



## Picaro

The Nubian 'conquest' of Egypt didn't last long, in fact it was barely a blip in the long history of Egypt. They only made a brief impact on part of the Nile Valley, in any case, in that very short time period. They certainly didn't turn Egypt 'black', and the slave trade from Africa to India was carried on for thousands of years, so yes, there would be dark skinned Indians running around; they are a small demographic, with the upper castes getting whiter and whiter as one gets further up the social scale.

Contrast that with the Arab and later Muslim slave trade, and the distinct lack of black faces in the ME; black slaves were simply killed when no longer useful, and weren't allowed to breed. Muslims only allowed black males who had survived full frontal castration into their lands after a massive slave revolt in Persia around the 11th or 12th century, don't remember the exact century off hand. That's why it's just hilarious to hear idiots like the Nation of Islam types babbling stupid gibberish all about 'evul Whitey N Stuff', and how Islam is the best 'religion' for blacks over Christianity or something.


----------



## historycisalpin

Meathead said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> Language is not alphabet. If it were, the Turks went from being Arabic speakers to Indo-Europeans essentially overnight and he Vietnamese became Indo-Europeans.
> 
> Save that air-head stuff for people with the knowledge and intellect of CC.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The oldest languages are those of the Semitic race, as well as the alphabets: you do not know how many words of Latin derived from ancient Semitic voices, but also from the greek.
> 
> Obviously the learned nonexistent language Indo-""European"" this do not say never.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> the oldest indo European language is SANSKRIT
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ALPHABET! FFS, AN ALPHABET IS NOT A LANGUAGE!
> 
> People spoke before they developed alphabets to symbolize speech.
> 
> Does anybody get this?!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you made no point-------the human brain ----WORLD WIDE----is so constructed that all  HUMAN BRAINS have the capacity for spoken and even written language.   ----Eventually ALL HUMANS   do elaborate a language---spoken----and then in some ways SYMBOLIZED.      As to evidence of language----old evidence is the written stuff------Sanskrit is the major precursor of INDO EUROPEAN LANGUAGES-----
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Leaving aside that lunatic's rantings, get yourself better informed:
> 
> Proto-Indo-European language - Wikipedia
> 
> It really is a fascinating topic although much of it is still theory.
Click to expand...


*Are theories from peanuts, protruding from the European academic corporatism and thread Eurocentric - German centrism, and pro occidentalism!*


----------



## irosie91

Meathead said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> the oldest indo European language is SANSKRIT
> 
> 
> 
> ALPHABET! FFS, AN ALPHABET IS NOT A LANGUAGE!
> 
> People spoke before they developed alphabets to symbolize speech.
> 
> Does anybody get this?!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you made no point-------the human brain ----WORLD WIDE----is so constructed that all  HUMAN BRAINS have the capacity for spoken and even written language.   ----Eventually ALL HUMANS   do elaborate a language---spoken----and then in some ways SYMBOLIZED.      As to evidence of language----old evidence is the written stuff------Sanskrit is the major precursor of INDO EUROPEAN LANGUAGES-----
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Leaving aside that lunatic's rantings, get yourself better informed:
> 
> Proto-Indo-European language - Wikipedia
> 
> It really is a fascinating topic although much of it is still theory.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am -----as to being INFORMED  ---in the  99th percentile-----wikki is not a source
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If you were well informed you would understand that although Sanskrit is the oldest Indo-European alphabet, it is not in fact the oldest language. As regards wiki, there are links to sources. Your belief in the simplicity that all languages were written is, well, a bit simple minded.
Click to expand...


If you were anything but a shit pawed lying poster you would not cast your shitty
and utterly untrue statement that I claimed or even came close to claiming
that SANSKRIT is the oldest language     In fact,  I CLEARLY stated that all
human societies develope language and-----eventually some sort of symbolic
representations of their language.    MANY human societies never had an 
alphabet-------you friggen idiot


----------



## irosie91

Picaro said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> The oldest languages are those of the Semitic race, as well as the alphabets: you do not know how many words of Latin derived from ancient Semitic voices, but also from the greek.
> 
> Obviously the learned nonexistent language Indo-""European"" this do not say never.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the oldest indo European language is SANSKRIT
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ALPHABET! FFS, AN ALPHABET IS NOT A LANGUAGE!
> 
> People spoke before they developed alphabets to symbolize speech.
> 
> Does anybody get this?!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you made no point-------the human brain ----WORLD WIDE----is so constructed that all  HUMAN BRAINS have the capacity for spoken and even written language.   ----Eventually ALL HUMANS   do elaborate a language---spoken----and then in some ways SYMBOLIZED.      As to evidence of language----old evidence is the written stuff------Sanskrit is the major precursor of INDO EUROPEAN LANGUAGES-----
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Leaving aside that lunatic's rantings, get yourself better informed:
> 
> Proto-Indo-European language - Wikipedia
> 
> It really is a fascinating topic although much of it is still theory.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Written symbols have been around a while; languages like Sanskrit that are both spoken and written are what I would limit the discussion to.
Click to expand...


It is reasonable in discussing ancient languages to discuss those that were
either written or recorded in someway AVAILABLE to us now------it works out
better


----------



## yiostheoy

historycisalpin said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The DNA  studies do not indicate that the ancient Egyptians were "BLACK"---or green or blue or white and pink
> 
> 
> 
> 
> were certainly not European or proto European
Click to expand...

The Europeans were Aryan who came from Aryana Afghanistan.  From there they spread to Persia, India, Russia, and Europe.

We don't know where the Egyptians came from.  It seems that they were always in Egypt as best history and archaeology tells us.  They could have been dark like the Ethiopians or they could have been caramel like the Arabs and Berbers.

The Assyrians and Babylonians were yet a third group who came from the area of what is today Syria and Iraq.

Moses tells us a neat story in his Tenakh that these 3 groups are from the 3 sons of Noah (a mystical flood actor taken from the story of Gilgamesh) with their respective different racial wives.  But where Moses got this story from he does not tell us.  Moses was a storyteller not an historian nor an archaeologist or anthropologist.


----------



## yiostheoy

irosie91 said:


> If you were anything but a shit pawed lying poster you would not cast your shitty
> and utterly untrue statement that I claimed or even came close to claiming
> that SANSKRIT is the oldest language     In fact,  I CLEARLY stated that all
> human societies develope language and-----eventually some sort of symbolic
> representations of their language.    MANY human societies never had an
> alphabet-------you friggen idiot


As far as we can tell Sanskrit is quite old, as old as the oldest other language, which would be Assyrian or Egyptian.

We just don't know.


----------



## irosie91

yiostheoy said:


> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The DNA  studies do not indicate that the ancient Egyptians were "BLACK"---or green or blue or white and pink
> 
> 
> 
> 
> were certainly not European or proto European
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Europeans were Aryan who came from Aryana Afghanistan.  From there they spread to Persia, India, Russia, and Europe.
> 
> We don't know where the Egyptians came from.  It seems that they were always in Egypt as best history and archaeology tells us.  They could have been dark like the Ethiopians or they could have been caramel like the Arabs and Berbers.
> 
> The Assyrians and Babylonians were yet a third group who came from the area of what is today Syria and Iraq.
> 
> Moses tells us a neat story in his Tenakh that these 3 groups are from the 3 sons of Noah (a mystical flood actor taken from the story of Gilgamesh) with their respective different racial wives.  But where Moses got this story from he does not tell us.  Moses was a storyteller not an historian nor an archaeologist or anthropologist.
Click to expand...


It is not at all clear to me that  Moses wrote the whole first five books.   I do not
believe he just INVENTED stuff------the stuff in the first  book seems to be
traditional belief-------lots of that a guy like Abraham would have brought from 
"UR"   ------somewhere in Iraq-----near the two rivers-----that it seems-----liked to flood the place now and them and------actually had a written language.   The traditional belief is that  Abraham was literate.-------


----------



## yiostheoy

irosie91 said:


> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> As it regards the peoples Dravidian to India, the Telluric Indus Valley civilization, It was exclusively colonized by Mesopotamian peoples belonging to the strain Semitic / Arabic.
> 
> Indian Mesopotamian strain / Arabic:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mesopotamian populations - Saharasian the Arabian strain:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Natives - telluric India:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROFLMAO     "Mesopotamian -----in the mind of maniac means  "ARAB"  ""
Click to expand...

The Arab Conquest in the 7th Century AD spread Arab influence and genetics to the formerly Assyrian/Babylonian area of Mesopotamia.

But originally these various peoples before the Arab Conquest were completely different.

Around the world we see a handful of unique ancient racial groups --

- Assyrians and Babylonians

- Aryans

- Egyptians and Arabs

- Black Africans south of the Sahara

- Chinese northeast of the Himalaya

- Meso Americans in Central America and Mexico.

- Japanese


----------



## historycisalpin

irosie91 said:


> Picaro said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> the oldest indo European language is SANSKRIT
> 
> 
> 
> ALPHABET! FFS, AN ALPHABET IS NOT A LANGUAGE!
> 
> People spoke before they developed alphabets to symbolize speech.
> 
> Does anybody get this?!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you made no point-------the human brain ----WORLD WIDE----is so constructed that all  HUMAN BRAINS have the capacity for spoken and even written language.   ----Eventually ALL HUMANS   do elaborate a language---spoken----and then in some ways SYMBOLIZED.      As to evidence of language----old evidence is the written stuff------Sanskrit is the major precursor of INDO EUROPEAN LANGUAGES-----
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Leaving aside that lunatic's rantings, get yourself better informed:
> 
> Proto-Indo-European language - Wikipedia
> 
> It really is a fascinating topic although much of it is still theory.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Written symbols have been around a while; languages like Sanskrit that are both spoken and written are what I would limit the discussion to.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is reasonable in discussing ancient languages to discuss those that were
> either written or recorded in someway AVAILABLE to us now------it works out
> better
Click to expand...




yiostheoy said:


> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The DNA  studies do not indicate that the ancient Egyptians were "BLACK"---or green or blue or white and pink
> 
> 
> 
> 
> were certainly not European or proto European
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Europeans were Aryan who came from Aryana Afghanistan.  From there they spread to Persia, India, Russia, and Europe.
> 
> We don't know where the Egyptians came from.  It seems that they were always in Egypt as best history and archaeology tells us.  They could have been dark like the Ethiopians or they could have been caramel like the Arabs and Berbers.
> 
> The Assyrians and Babylonians were yet a third group who came from the area of what is today Syria and Iraq.
> 
> Moses tells us a neat story in his Tenakh that these 3 groups are from the 3 sons of Noah (a mystical flood actor taken from the story of Gilgamesh) with their respective different racial wives.  But where Moses got this story from he does not tell us.  Moses was a storyteller not an historian nor an archaeologist or anthropologist.
Click to expand...


The sons of Japheth (according to my thinking), thus partially mixing with European women (indigenous native), going to create what would later become the so-called people "Nordic".


----------



## yiostheoy

irosie91 said:


> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The DNA  studies do not indicate that the ancient Egyptians were "BLACK"---or green or blue or white and pink
> 
> 
> 
> 
> were certainly not European or proto European
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Europeans were Aryan who came from Aryana Afghanistan.  From there they spread to Persia, India, Russia, and Europe.
> 
> We don't know where the Egyptians came from.  It seems that they were always in Egypt as best history and archaeology tells us.  They could have been dark like the Ethiopians or they could have been caramel like the Arabs and Berbers.
> 
> The Assyrians and Babylonians were yet a third group who came from the area of what is today Syria and Iraq.
> 
> Moses tells us a neat story in his Tenakh that these 3 groups are from the 3 sons of Noah (a mystical flood actor taken from the story of Gilgamesh) with their respective different racial wives.  But where Moses got this story from he does not tell us.  Moses was a storyteller not an historian nor an archaeologist or anthropologist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is not at all clear to me that  Moses wrote the whole first five books.   I do not
> believe he just INVENTED stuff------the stuff in the first  book seems to be
> traditional belief-------lots of that a guy like Abraham would have brought from
> "UR"   ------somewhere in Iraq-----near the two rivers-----that it seems-----liked to flood the place now and them and------actually had a written language.   The traditional belief is that  Abraham was literate.-------
Click to expand...

I DO believe Moses invented stuff.  All evidence points to it.

We are told by himself and by Josephus that Moses was raised as a Prince Of Egypt and as such he would have been well educated by temple scribes.  Moses seems to have adapted elements of ancient history prior to himself into his own stories -- their Gods, demons, a flood, river infanticide, and so forth.  He mentions the Hittites and we have since discovered archaeology about the Hittites.  He could not have made this up.  And the Jews could not have made it up either.

Whether it was a sky god named YHVH or schizophrenia that compelled Moses to lead the Hebrews out of Egypt we will never know.  But once he did it the Hebrews became quite hostile towards him and so he had to invent stories to keep them under control.

That he did.


----------



## yiostheoy

historycisalpin said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Picaro said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> ALPHABET! FFS, AN ALPHABET IS NOT A LANGUAGE!
> 
> People spoke before they developed alphabets to symbolize speech.
> 
> Does anybody get this?!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you made no point-------the human brain ----WORLD WIDE----is so constructed that all  HUMAN BRAINS have the capacity for spoken and even written language.   ----Eventually ALL HUMANS   do elaborate a language---spoken----and then in some ways SYMBOLIZED.      As to evidence of language----old evidence is the written stuff------Sanskrit is the major precursor of INDO EUROPEAN LANGUAGES-----
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Leaving aside that lunatic's rantings, get yourself better informed:
> 
> Proto-Indo-European language - Wikipedia
> 
> It really is a fascinating topic although much of it is still theory.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Written symbols have been around a while; languages like Sanskrit that are both spoken and written are what I would limit the discussion to.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is reasonable in discussing ancient languages to discuss those that were
> either written or recorded in someway AVAILABLE to us now------it works out
> better
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The DNA  studies do not indicate that the ancient Egyptians were "BLACK"---or green or blue or white and pink
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> were certainly not European or proto European
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Europeans were Aryan who came from Aryana Afghanistan.  From there they spread to Persia, India, Russia, and Europe.
> 
> We don't know where the Egyptians came from.  It seems that they were always in Egypt as best history and archaeology tells us.  They could have been dark like the Ethiopians or they could have been caramel like the Arabs and Berbers.
> 
> The Assyrians and Babylonians were yet a third group who came from the area of what is today Syria and Iraq.
> 
> Moses tells us a neat story in his Tenakh that these 3 groups are from the 3 sons of Noah (a mystical flood actor taken from the story of Gilgamesh) with their respective different racial wives.  But where Moses got this story from he does not tell us.  Moses was a storyteller not an historian nor an archaeologist or anthropologist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The sons of Japheth (according to my thinking), thus partially mixing with European women (indigenous native), going to create what would later become the so-called people "Nordic".
Click to expand...

Correct -- Japheth is Hebrew/Aramaic for "beautiful".  Jaffe the city has the same name.  By coincidence its location on the rocky cliffs of the Eastern Med makes it a very beautiful city, perhaps the most beautiful in the world.

Japheth's bride was probably a blonde.  Shem's bride was probably an Assyrian/Babylonian.  Ham's bride was probably Egyptian.  But you need to remember this is just one of the stories that Moses dreamed up because Moses did not give us an honest report of where he learned of these things.  It would have been nice to know which Egyptian scribes taught him this story and why?


----------



## historycisalpin

yiostheoy said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> As it regards the peoples Dravidian to India, the Telluric Indus Valley civilization, It was exclusively colonized by Mesopotamian peoples belonging to the strain Semitic / Arabic.
> 
> Indian Mesopotamian strain / Arabic:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mesopotamian populations - Saharasian the Arabian strain:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Natives - telluric India:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROFLMAO     "Mesopotamian -----in the mind of maniac means  "ARAB"  ""
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Arab Conquest in the 7th Century AD spread Arab influence and genetics to the formerly Assyrian/Babylonian area of Mesopotamia.
> 
> But originally these various peoples before the Arab Conquest were completely different.
> 
> Around the world we see a handful of unique ancient racial groups --
> 
> - Assyrians and Babylonians
> 
> - Aryans
> 
> - Egyptians and Arabs
> 
> - Black Africans south of the Sahara
> 
> - Chinese northeast of the Himalaya
> 
> - Meso Americans in Central America and Mexico.
> 
> - Japanese
Click to expand...


You forgot to add the Jews, as part of the same strain.

There are characteristics ethno anthropological of African/Semitic, Semitic / Asian, Semitic / European, as indeed there are characteristics  African/European and African/Asiatic.


----------



## yiostheoy

historycisalpin said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> The oldest languages are those of the Semitic race, as well as the alphabets: you do not know how many words of Latin derived from ancient Semitic voices, but also from the greek.
> 
> Obviously the learned nonexistent language Indo-""European"" this do not say never.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the oldest indo European language is SANSKRIT
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ALPHABET! FFS, AN ALPHABET IS NOT A LANGUAGE!
> 
> People spoke before they developed alphabets to symbolize speech.
> 
> Does anybody get this?!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you made no point-------the human brain ----WORLD WIDE----is so constructed that all  HUMAN BRAINS have the capacity for spoken and even written language.   ----Eventually ALL HUMANS   do elaborate a language---spoken----and then in some ways SYMBOLIZED.      As to evidence of language----old evidence is the written stuff------Sanskrit is the major precursor of INDO EUROPEAN LANGUAGES-----
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Leaving aside that lunatic's rantings, get yourself better informed:
> 
> Proto-Indo-European language - Wikipedia
> 
> It really is a fascinating topic although much of it is still theory.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Are theories from peanuts, protruding from the European academic corporatism and thread Eurocentric - German centrism, and pro occidentalism!*
Click to expand...

Pro-Occidentalism evolved from the British Empire and conquest of the known world.  It came on the heels of the Spanish Empire and conquest of the Western Hemisphere.

German evolution as far as we can tell is from Persia according to Herodotus who also calls the Persians and Indians "Aryans".


----------



## irosie91

yiostheoy said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The DNA  studies do not indicate that the ancient Egyptians were "BLACK"---or green or blue or white and pink
> 
> 
> 
> 
> were certainly not European or proto European
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Europeans were Aryan who came from Aryana Afghanistan.  From there they spread to Persia, India, Russia, and Europe.
> 
> We don't know where the Egyptians came from.  It seems that they were always in Egypt as best history and archaeology tells us.  They could have been dark like the Ethiopians or they could have been caramel like the Arabs and Berbers.
> 
> The Assyrians and Babylonians were yet a third group who came from the area of what is today Syria and Iraq.
> 
> Moses tells us a neat story in his Tenakh that these 3 groups are from the 3 sons of Noah (a mystical flood actor taken from the story of Gilgamesh) with their respective different racial wives.  But where Moses got this story from he does not tell us.  Moses was a storyteller not an historian nor an archaeologist or anthropologist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is not at all clear to me that  Moses wrote the whole first five books.   I do not
> believe he just INVENTED stuff------the stuff in the first  book seems to be
> traditional belief-------lots of that a guy like Abraham would have brought from
> "UR"   ------somewhere in Iraq-----near the two rivers-----that it seems-----liked to flood the place now and them and------actually had a written language.   The traditional belief is that  Abraham was literate.-------
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I DO believe Moses invented stuff.  All evidence points to it.
> 
> We are told by himself and by Josephus that Moses was raised as a Prince Of Egypt and as such he would have been well educated by temple scribes.  Moses seems to have adapted elements of ancient history prior to himself into his own stories -- their Gods, demons, a flood, river infanticide, and so forth.  He mentions the Hittites and we have since discovered archaeology about the Hittites.  He could not have made this up.  And the Jews could not have made it up either.
> 
> Whether it was a sky god named YHVH or schizophrenia that compelled Moses to lead the Hebrews out of Egypt we will never know.  But once he did it the Hebrews became quite hostile towards him and so he had to invent stories to keep them under control.
> 
> That he did.
Click to expand...


if there is anything schizophrenic about the first five books of the bible ----it is
your reconstruction of  Moses.     What we do know is that Josephus never met
Moses


----------



## yiostheoy

irosie91 said:


> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The DNA  studies do not indicate that the ancient Egyptians were "BLACK"---or green or blue or white and pink
> 
> 
> 
> 
> were certainly not European or proto European
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Europeans were Aryan who came from Aryana Afghanistan.  From there they spread to Persia, India, Russia, and Europe.
> 
> We don't know where the Egyptians came from.  It seems that they were always in Egypt as best history and archaeology tells us.  They could have been dark like the Ethiopians or they could have been caramel like the Arabs and Berbers.
> 
> The Assyrians and Babylonians were yet a third group who came from the area of what is today Syria and Iraq.
> 
> Moses tells us a neat story in his Tenakh that these 3 groups are from the 3 sons of Noah (a mystical flood actor taken from the story of Gilgamesh) with their respective different racial wives.  But where Moses got this story from he does not tell us.  Moses was a storyteller not an historian nor an archaeologist or anthropologist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is not at all clear to me that  Moses wrote the whole first five books.   I do not
> believe he just INVENTED stuff------the stuff in the first  book seems to be
> traditional belief-------lots of that a guy like Abraham would have brought from
> "UR"   ------somewhere in Iraq-----near the two rivers-----that it seems-----liked to flood the place now and them and------actually had a written language.   The traditional belief is that  Abraham was literate.-------
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I DO believe Moses invented stuff.  All evidence points to it.
> 
> We are told by himself and by Josephus that Moses was raised as a Prince Of Egypt and as such he would have been well educated by temple scribes.  Moses seems to have adapted elements of ancient history prior to himself into his own stories -- their Gods, demons, a flood, river infanticide, and so forth.  He mentions the Hittites and we have since discovered archaeology about the Hittites.  He could not have made this up.  And the Jews could not have made it up either.
> 
> Whether it was a sky god named YHVH or schizophrenia that compelled Moses to lead the Hebrews out of Egypt we will never know.  But once he did it the Hebrews became quite hostile towards him and so he had to invent stories to keep them under control.
> 
> That he did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> if there is anything schizophrenic about the first five books of the bible ----it is
> your reconstruction of  Moses.     What we do know is that Josephus never met
> Moses
Click to expand...

Josephus was drawing from his own historical sources at Rome.

His own narrative is much more extensive than the Tenakh itself.

As such Moses was clearly a historical figure.

Where he got his stories from is still a mystery.

Jews are believing him less and less.

Christians are starting to get smarter too.

Mooseleems don't really give a sh!t because they have Mo their own schizophrenic prophet and his angelic messenger plagiarized as Gabriel from the Tehnakh and New Testament.

In the Tenakh Gabriel informs Abraham his wife Sarah will have a child.  Then Gabriel goes on to accompany Michael the Archangel to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah.  In the Greek New Testament Gabriel informs Mary Of Nazareth she will give birth to Jesus, as we all have read.


----------



## irosie91

historycisalpin said:


> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> As it regards the peoples Dravidian to India, the Telluric Indus Valley civilization, It was exclusively colonized by Mesopotamian peoples belonging to the strain Semitic / Arabic.
> 
> Indian Mesopotamian strain / Arabic:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mesopotamian populations - Saharasian the Arabian strain:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Natives - telluric India:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROFLMAO     "Mesopotamian -----in the mind of maniac means  "ARAB"  ""
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Arab Conquest in the 7th Century AD spread Arab influence and genetics to the formerly Assyrian/Babylonian area of Mesopotamia.
> 
> But originally these various peoples before the Arab Conquest were completely different.
> 
> Around the world we see a handful of unique ancient racial groups --
> 
> - Assyrians and Babylonians
> 
> - Aryans
> 
> - Egyptians and Arabs
> 
> - Black Africans south of the Sahara
> 
> - Chinese northeast of the Himalaya
> 
> - Meso Americans in Central America and Mexico.
> 
> - Japanese
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You forgot to add the Jews, as part of the same strain.
> 
> There are characteristics ethno anthropological of African/Semitic, Semitic / Asian, Semitic / European, as indeed there are characteristics  African/European and African/Asiatic.
Click to expand...


Human beans have been MOBILE  for many many many Millennia-------they also
BREED with each other in nature and have been doing BIG TIME  gene mingle
for Many many Millennia-------their ain't no pure breed of  HUMAN BEAN.   The only factor that comes into play for human bean genetic mingle------is PROXIMITY


----------



## irosie91

yiostheoy said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> were certainly not European or proto European
> 
> 
> 
> The Europeans were Aryan who came from Aryana Afghanistan.  From there they spread to Persia, India, Russia, and Europe.
> 
> We don't know where the Egyptians came from.  It seems that they were always in Egypt as best history and archaeology tells us.  They could have been dark like the Ethiopians or they could have been caramel like the Arabs and Berbers.
> 
> The Assyrians and Babylonians were yet a third group who came from the area of what is today Syria and Iraq.
> 
> Moses tells us a neat story in his Tenakh that these 3 groups are from the 3 sons of Noah (a mystical flood actor taken from the story of Gilgamesh) with their respective different racial wives.  But where Moses got this story from he does not tell us.  Moses was a storyteller not an historian nor an archaeologist or anthropologist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is not at all clear to me that  Moses wrote the whole first five books.   I do not
> believe he just INVENTED stuff------the stuff in the first  book seems to be
> traditional belief-------lots of that a guy like Abraham would have brought from
> "UR"   ------somewhere in Iraq-----near the two rivers-----that it seems-----liked to flood the place now and them and------actually had a written language.   The traditional belief is that  Abraham was literate.-------
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I DO believe Moses invented stuff.  All evidence points to it.
> 
> We are told by himself and by Josephus that Moses was raised as a Prince Of Egypt and as such he would have been well educated by temple scribes.  Moses seems to have adapted elements of ancient history prior to himself into his own stories -- their Gods, demons, a flood, river infanticide, and so forth.  He mentions the Hittites and we have since discovered archaeology about the Hittites.  He could not have made this up.  And the Jews could not have made it up either.
> 
> Whether it was a sky god named YHVH or schizophrenia that compelled Moses to lead the Hebrews out of Egypt we will never know.  But once he did it the Hebrews became quite hostile towards him and so he had to invent stories to keep them under control.
> 
> That he did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> if there is anything schizophrenic about the first five books of the bible ----it is
> your reconstruction of  Moses.     What we do know is that Josephus never met
> Moses
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Josephus was drawing from his own historical sources at Rome.
> 
> His own narrative is much more extensive than the Tenakh itself.
> 
> As such Moses was clearly a historical figure.
> 
> Where he got his stories from is still a mystery.
> 
> Jews are believing him less and less.
> 
> Christians are starting to get smarter too.
> 
> Mooseleems don't really give a sh!t because they have Mo their own schizophrenic prophet and his angelic messenger plagiarized as Gabriel from the Tehnakh and New Testament.
Click to expand...


Josephus had access to lots before he got to Rome------the tanach was not
the only book in Judea.    He also witnessed lots of stuff.     Gabriel did not
plagiarize


----------



## yiostheoy

irosie91 said:


> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Europeans were Aryan who came from Aryana Afghanistan.  From there they spread to Persia, India, Russia, and Europe.
> 
> We don't know where the Egyptians came from.  It seems that they were always in Egypt as best history and archaeology tells us.  They could have been dark like the Ethiopians or they could have been caramel like the Arabs and Berbers.
> 
> The Assyrians and Babylonians were yet a third group who came from the area of what is today Syria and Iraq.
> 
> Moses tells us a neat story in his Tenakh that these 3 groups are from the 3 sons of Noah (a mystical flood actor taken from the story of Gilgamesh) with their respective different racial wives.  But where Moses got this story from he does not tell us.  Moses was a storyteller not an historian nor an archaeologist or anthropologist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is not at all clear to me that  Moses wrote the whole first five books.   I do not
> believe he just INVENTED stuff------the stuff in the first  book seems to be
> traditional belief-------lots of that a guy like Abraham would have brought from
> "UR"   ------somewhere in Iraq-----near the two rivers-----that it seems-----liked to flood the place now and them and------actually had a written language.   The traditional belief is that  Abraham was literate.-------
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I DO believe Moses invented stuff.  All evidence points to it.
> 
> We are told by himself and by Josephus that Moses was raised as a Prince Of Egypt and as such he would have been well educated by temple scribes.  Moses seems to have adapted elements of ancient history prior to himself into his own stories -- their Gods, demons, a flood, river infanticide, and so forth.  He mentions the Hittites and we have since discovered archaeology about the Hittites.  He could not have made this up.  And the Jews could not have made it up either.
> 
> Whether it was a sky god named YHVH or schizophrenia that compelled Moses to lead the Hebrews out of Egypt we will never know.  But once he did it the Hebrews became quite hostile towards him and so he had to invent stories to keep them under control.
> 
> That he did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> if there is anything schizophrenic about the first five books of the bible ----it is
> your reconstruction of  Moses.     What we do know is that Josephus never met
> Moses
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Josephus was drawing from his own historical sources at Rome.
> 
> His own narrative is much more extensive than the Tenakh itself.
> 
> As such Moses was clearly a historical figure.
> 
> Where he got his stories from is still a mystery.
> 
> Jews are believing him less and less.
> 
> Christians are starting to get smarter too.
> 
> Mooseleems don't really give a sh!t because they have Mo their own schizophrenic prophet and his angelic messenger plagiarized as Gabriel from the Tehnakh and New Testament.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Josephus had access to lots before he got to Rome------the tanach was not
> the only book in Judea.    He also witnessed lots of stuff.     Gabriel did not
> plagiarize
Click to expand...

Gabriel was plagiarized by Mo.  You did not get what I was explaining.


----------



## irosie91

yiostheoy said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is not at all clear to me that  Moses wrote the whole first five books.   I do not
> believe he just INVENTED stuff------the stuff in the first  book seems to be
> traditional belief-------lots of that a guy like Abraham would have brought from
> "UR"   ------somewhere in Iraq-----near the two rivers-----that it seems-----liked to flood the place now and them and------actually had a written language.   The traditional belief is that  Abraham was literate.-------
> 
> 
> 
> I DO believe Moses invented stuff.  All evidence points to it.
> 
> We are told by himself and by Josephus that Moses was raised as a Prince Of Egypt and as such he would have been well educated by temple scribes.  Moses seems to have adapted elements of ancient history prior to himself into his own stories -- their Gods, demons, a flood, river infanticide, and so forth.  He mentions the Hittites and we have since discovered archaeology about the Hittites.  He could not have made this up.  And the Jews could not have made it up either.
> 
> Whether it was a sky god named YHVH or schizophrenia that compelled Moses to lead the Hebrews out of Egypt we will never know.  But once he did it the Hebrews became quite hostile towards him and so he had to invent stories to keep them under control.
> 
> That he did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> if there is anything schizophrenic about the first five books of the bible ----it is
> your reconstruction of  Moses.     What we do know is that Josephus never met
> Moses
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Josephus was drawing from his own historical sources at Rome.
> 
> His own narrative is much more extensive than the Tenakh itself.
> 
> As such Moses was clearly a historical figure.
> 
> Where he got his stories from is still a mystery.
> 
> Jews are believing him less and less.
> 
> Christians are starting to get smarter too.
> 
> Mooseleems don't really give a sh!t because they have Mo their own schizophrenic prophet and his angelic messenger plagiarized as Gabriel from the Tehnakh and New Testament.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Josephus had access to lots before he got to Rome------the tanach was not
> the only book in Judea.    He also witnessed lots of stuff.     Gabriel did not
> plagiarize
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Gabriel was plagiarized by Mo.  You did not get what I was explaining.
Click to expand...


sure I did-------I just happen to be fond of Gabriel and KNOW that he has no time for playing------academic cheating.    Gabriel is in charge of all kinds of  GUARD 
MISSIONS-------and even a few  hand to hand brawls


----------



## yiostheoy

historycisalpin said:


> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> As it regards the peoples Dravidian to India, the Telluric Indus Valley civilization, It was exclusively colonized by Mesopotamian peoples belonging to the strain Semitic / Arabic.
> 
> Indian Mesopotamian strain / Arabic:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mesopotamian populations - Saharasian the Arabian strain:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Natives - telluric India:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROFLMAO     "Mesopotamian -----in the mind of maniac means  "ARAB"  ""
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Arab Conquest in the 7th Century AD spread Arab influence and genetics to the formerly Assyrian/Babylonian area of Mesopotamia.
> 
> But originally these various peoples before the Arab Conquest were completely different.
> 
> Around the world we see a handful of unique ancient racial groups --
> 
> - Assyrians and Babylonians
> 
> - Aryans
> 
> - Egyptians and Arabs
> 
> - Black Africans south of the Sahara
> 
> - Chinese northeast of the Himalaya
> 
> - Meso Americans in Central America and Mexico.
> 
> - Japanese
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You forgot to add the Jews, as part of the same strain.
> 
> There are characteristics ethno anthropological of African/Semitic, Semitic / Asian, Semitic / European, as indeed there are characteristics  African/European and African/Asiatic.
Click to expand...

Modern Jews are a hybrid of ancient Babylonian and modern Europeans.  According to Moses' stories they were originally descendant from the Babylonian named Abraham and his 2 wives and their two slaves -- 4 wives total.  Leah is the mother supposedly of the Jews and she was Babylonian too.


----------



## yiostheoy

irosie91 said:


> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> I DO believe Moses invented stuff.  All evidence points to it.
> 
> We are told by himself and by Josephus that Moses was raised as a Prince Of Egypt and as such he would have been well educated by temple scribes.  Moses seems to have adapted elements of ancient history prior to himself into his own stories -- their Gods, demons, a flood, river infanticide, and so forth.  He mentions the Hittites and we have since discovered archaeology about the Hittites.  He could not have made this up.  And the Jews could not have made it up either.
> 
> Whether it was a sky god named YHVH or schizophrenia that compelled Moses to lead the Hebrews out of Egypt we will never know.  But once he did it the Hebrews became quite hostile towards him and so he had to invent stories to keep them under control.
> 
> That he did.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> if there is anything schizophrenic about the first five books of the bible ----it is
> your reconstruction of  Moses.     What we do know is that Josephus never met
> Moses
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Josephus was drawing from his own historical sources at Rome.
> 
> His own narrative is much more extensive than the Tenakh itself.
> 
> As such Moses was clearly a historical figure.
> 
> Where he got his stories from is still a mystery.
> 
> Jews are believing him less and less.
> 
> Christians are starting to get smarter too.
> 
> Mooseleems don't really give a sh!t because they have Mo their own schizophrenic prophet and his angelic messenger plagiarized as Gabriel from the Tehnakh and New Testament.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Josephus had access to lots before he got to Rome------the tanach was not
> the only book in Judea.    He also witnessed lots of stuff.     Gabriel did not
> plagiarize
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Gabriel was plagiarized by Mo.  You did not get what I was explaining.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> sure I did-------I just happen to be fond of Gabriel and KNOW that he has no time for playing------academic cheating.    Gabriel is in charge of all kinds of  GUARD
> MISSIONS-------and even a few  hand to hand brawls
Click to expand...

Yes, Gabriel was Michael's bodyguard on the trip to Sodom and Gomorrah and he is also the messenger to Abraham and Mary.


----------



## irosie91

yiostheoy said:


> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> As it regards the peoples Dravidian to India, the Telluric Indus Valley civilization, It was exclusively colonized by Mesopotamian peoples belonging to the strain Semitic / Arabic.
> 
> Indian Mesopotamian strain / Arabic:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mesopotamian populations - Saharasian the Arabian strain:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Natives - telluric India:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROFLMAO     "Mesopotamian -----in the mind of maniac means  "ARAB"  ""
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Arab Conquest in the 7th Century AD spread Arab influence and genetics to the formerly Assyrian/Babylonian area of Mesopotamia.
> 
> But originally these various peoples before the Arab Conquest were completely different.
> 
> Around the world we see a handful of unique ancient racial groups --
> 
> - Assyrians and Babylonians
> 
> - Aryans
> 
> - Egyptians and Arabs
> 
> - Black Africans south of the Sahara
> 
> - Chinese northeast of the Himalaya
> 
> - Meso Americans in Central America and Mexico.
> 
> - Japanese
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You forgot to add the Jews, as part of the same strain.
> 
> There are characteristics ethno anthropological of African/Semitic, Semitic / Asian, Semitic / European, as indeed there are characteristics  African/European and African/Asiatic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Modern Jews are a hybrid of ancient Babylonian and modern Europeans.  According to Moses' stories there were originally descendant from the Babylonian named Abraham and his 2 wives and their two slaves -- 4 wives total.  Leah is the mother supposedly of the Jews and she was Babylonian too.
Click to expand...


Leah was probably from Lebanon like her sister Rachel.    You may be thinking of   SARAH  who came from the land of the two rivers-----MESOPOTAMIA


----------



## yiostheoy

A lot of modern archaeology and anthropology validates the existence of Moses.  However we still don't know where he got his stories from.  He did not properly document his sources.  He could have, but it would have undermined his story about being an all powerful messenger of YHVH.


----------



## irosie91

yiostheoy said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> if there is anything schizophrenic about the first five books of the bible ----it is
> your reconstruction of  Moses.     What we do know is that Josephus never met
> Moses
> 
> 
> 
> Josephus was drawing from his own historical sources at Rome.
> 
> His own narrative is much more extensive than the Tenakh itself.
> 
> As such Moses was clearly a historical figure.
> 
> Where he got his stories from is still a mystery.
> 
> Jews are believing him less and less.
> 
> Christians are starting to get smarter too.
> 
> Mooseleems don't really give a sh!t because they have Mo their own schizophrenic prophet and his angelic messenger plagiarized as Gabriel from the Tehnakh and New Testament.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Josephus had access to lots before he got to Rome------the tanach was not
> the only book in Judea.    He also witnessed lots of stuff.     Gabriel did not
> plagiarize
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Gabriel was plagiarized by Mo.  You did not get what I was explaining.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> sure I did-------I just happen to be fond of Gabriel and KNOW that he has no time for playing------academic cheating.    Gabriel is in charge of all kinds of  GUARD
> MISSIONS-------and even a few  hand to hand brawls
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, Gabriel was Michael's bodyguard on the trip to Sodom and Gomorrah and he is also the messenger to Abraham and Mary.
Click to expand...


busy guy ------with important work-------I doubt he had much time to hang
out in a bat cave with  an illiterate  Bedouin in arabia


----------



## yiostheoy

irosie91 said:


> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> As it regards the peoples Dravidian to India, the Telluric Indus Valley civilization, It was exclusively colonized by Mesopotamian peoples belonging to the strain Semitic / Arabic.
> 
> Indian Mesopotamian strain / Arabic:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mesopotamian populations - Saharasian the Arabian strain:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Natives - telluric India:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROFLMAO     "Mesopotamian -----in the mind of maniac means  "ARAB"  ""
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Arab Conquest in the 7th Century AD spread Arab influence and genetics to the formerly Assyrian/Babylonian area of Mesopotamia.
> 
> But originally these various peoples before the Arab Conquest were completely different.
> 
> Around the world we see a handful of unique ancient racial groups --
> 
> - Assyrians and Babylonians
> 
> - Aryans
> 
> - Egyptians and Arabs
> 
> - Black Africans south of the Sahara
> 
> - Chinese northeast of the Himalaya
> 
> - Meso Americans in Central America and Mexico.
> 
> - Japanese
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You forgot to add the Jews, as part of the same strain.
> 
> There are characteristics ethno anthropological of African/Semitic, Semitic / Asian, Semitic / European, as indeed there are characteristics  African/European and African/Asiatic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Modern Jews are a hybrid of ancient Babylonian and modern Europeans.  According to Moses' stories there were originally descendant from the Babylonian named Abraham and his 2 wives and their two slaves -- 4 wives total.  Leah is the mother supposedly of the Jews and she was Babylonian too.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Leah was probably from Lebanon like her sister Rachel.    You may be thinking of   SARAH  who came from the land of the two rivers-----MESOPOTAMIA
Click to expand...

Oops -- my mistake -- good catch.


----------



## yiostheoy

irosie91 said:


> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Josephus was drawing from his own historical sources at Rome.
> 
> His own narrative is much more extensive than the Tenakh itself.
> 
> As such Moses was clearly a historical figure.
> 
> Where he got his stories from is still a mystery.
> 
> Jews are believing him less and less.
> 
> Christians are starting to get smarter too.
> 
> Mooseleems don't really give a sh!t because they have Mo their own schizophrenic prophet and his angelic messenger plagiarized as Gabriel from the Tehnakh and New Testament.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Josephus had access to lots before he got to Rome------the tanach was not
> the only book in Judea.    He also witnessed lots of stuff.     Gabriel did not
> plagiarize
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Gabriel was plagiarized by Mo.  You did not get what I was explaining.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> sure I did-------I just happen to be fond of Gabriel and KNOW that he has no time for playing------academic cheating.    Gabriel is in charge of all kinds of  GUARD
> MISSIONS-------and even a few  hand to hand brawls
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, Gabriel was Michael's bodyguard on the trip to Sodom and Gomorrah and he is also the messenger to Abraham and Mary.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> busy guy ------with important work-------I doubt he had much time to hang
> out in a bat cave with  an illiterate  Bedouin in arabia
Click to expand...

There are anthropological theories that Mo never existed but was invented by Zoroastrians in Egypt trying to reform Zoroastrianism.  Hence they invented Islam -- sort of like the Protestant Reformation re-invented Catholicism.


----------



## irosie91

yiostheoy said:


> A lot of modern archaeology and anthropology validates the existence of Moses.  However we still don't know where he got his stories from.  He did not properly document his sources.  He could have, but it would have undermined his story about being an all powerful messenger of YHVH.



I do not remember him saying     I AM AN ALL POWERFUL MESSENGER OF FOUR LETTERS,  to wit    YHVH       Traditionally he is said to have communicated
DIRECTLY  with    "GOD"       I do not believe that  Moses authored the  TORAH  (ie first five books of the bible-----all by himself)


----------



## historycisalpin

yiostheoy said:


> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> the oldest indo European language is SANSKRIT
> 
> 
> 
> ALPHABET! FFS, AN ALPHABET IS NOT A LANGUAGE!
> 
> People spoke before they developed alphabets to symbolize speech.
> 
> Does anybody get this?!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you made no point-------the human brain ----WORLD WIDE----is so constructed that all  HUMAN BRAINS have the capacity for spoken and even written language.   ----Eventually ALL HUMANS   do elaborate a language---spoken----and then in some ways SYMBOLIZED.      As to evidence of language----old evidence is the written stuff------Sanskrit is the major precursor of INDO EUROPEAN LANGUAGES-----
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Leaving aside that lunatic's rantings, get yourself better informed:
> 
> Proto-Indo-European language - Wikipedia
> 
> It really is a fascinating topic although much of it is still theory.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Are theories from peanuts, protruding from the European academic corporatism and thread Eurocentric - German centrism, and pro occidentalism!*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Pro-Occidentalism evolved from the British Empire and conquest of the known world.  It came on the heels of the Spanish Empire and conquest of the Western Hemisphere.
> 
> German evolution as far as we can tell is from Persia according to Herodotus who also calls the Persians and Indians "Aryans".
Click to expand...


This did not imply that they were proto Germanic, but Arians as originating from Saharasian territories (certainly not Europe)

The Indo-Europeans, blondes vanguards, Giovanni Semerano:

They must have conspired linguists learned, clearly offspring: [We have to give a name to the messengers of the origins. They can not be eco vain as all the echoes. Li will say Indo giving them an industrious] personality.
Among many they chose the name that says a blatant impropriety, Indo-European, combining two words of different meaning: ethnic and geographical. Wing wider than that team was in the escort Hittites, who with myeloma emphasis were called "Blondes avant-garde." In such distorted mirrors have stocks these heroic avant-garde,
in an antique mirror of red copper or the bottom of a brazier of the same metal, it is especially sealed and hidden.
"Blondes vanguard"! Now when rhetoric squats on a page like the lion after the meal, farewell to the good intentions of being relevant to the theme in an exhibition performance. Here catches me the need to remember that my latest writing is part of the cycle of my works that aim to confirm the historical insight: a bond of cultural brotherhood league for five thousand years Europe to 'the West, Mesopotamia, today's Iraq where flourished unreachable civilizations, cultures of Sumer, Akkad, Babylon; It is still alive the charm of that cradle of the arts, the sciences, of the Law.
The vanguard of that world came down to us: the big dial of the story had sounded the hour of Sargon the Great; we are in the third millennium BC Invincible leader, had put in precipitating leaks armies who wanted to prevent his march; He came to the Mediterranean and [washed his weapons in his Upper] Sea, as he says. It 's almost unnecessary to add that Sargon is the founder of the dynasty of Akkad, so she told her Akkadian language, with other languages of the Semitic race, he has brought much light to our knowledge.
The Indo-conception had not yet flowered in linguists head. What relationships have the story of Sargon with our history ??
In an ancient stele, Sargon, King of Battle, as he was called, presents its peoples pretty much in these terms: "I am Sargon [...] There I met my father; my mother was a priestess; I produced, I He puts in a basket that sealed it with pitch; set me down on the river that submerged me and I was not floated at home dell'innaffiatore Aqqi ".
But all this evokes the birth of Romulus and Remus: also sons of a priestess; They never knew his father; also places a basket, presumably smeared with pitch, placed on the river and then driven to the house of the shepherd Faustulus.
Then, adults, Romulus killed Remus; and also in the home of Sargon, after his death, his son Rimush had been killed in a conspiracy of his brother indulged palace.
It should be just remember that Remo and Rimush names are Hypocorism voice Akkadian rimu "loved". The Akkadian name presents an anaphoric - sb (- š). So ancient shadows, ancient glories back down to us from the East to add to those of our own world.

The fairytale Indo-European.


----------



## irosie91

yiostheoy said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Josephus had access to lots before he got to Rome------the tanach was not
> the only book in Judea.    He also witnessed lots of stuff.     Gabriel did not
> plagiarize
> 
> 
> 
> Gabriel was plagiarized by Mo.  You did not get what I was explaining.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> sure I did-------I just happen to be fond of Gabriel and KNOW that he has no time for playing------academic cheating.    Gabriel is in charge of all kinds of  GUARD
> MISSIONS-------and even a few  hand to hand brawls
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, Gabriel was Michael's bodyguard on the trip to Sodom and Gomorrah and he is also the messenger to Abraham and Mary.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> busy guy ------with important work-------I doubt he had much time to hang
> out in a bat cave with  an illiterate  Bedouin in arabia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are anthropological theories that Mo never existed but was invented by Zoroastrians in Egypt trying to reform Zoroastrianism.  Hence they invented Islam -- sort of like the Protestant Reformation re-invented Catholicism.
Click to expand...



Zoroastrians in Egypt invented  MO?      Maybe you are trying to say that
Zoroastrians in Arabia invented Mo  (???)


----------



## yiostheoy

historycisalpin said:


> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> ALPHABET! FFS, AN ALPHABET IS NOT A LANGUAGE!
> 
> People spoke before they developed alphabets to symbolize speech.
> 
> Does anybody get this?!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you made no point-------the human brain ----WORLD WIDE----is so constructed that all  HUMAN BRAINS have the capacity for spoken and even written language.   ----Eventually ALL HUMANS   do elaborate a language---spoken----and then in some ways SYMBOLIZED.      As to evidence of language----old evidence is the written stuff------Sanskrit is the major precursor of INDO EUROPEAN LANGUAGES-----
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Leaving aside that lunatic's rantings, get yourself better informed:
> 
> Proto-Indo-European language - Wikipedia
> 
> It really is a fascinating topic although much of it is still theory.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Are theories from peanuts, protruding from the European academic corporatism and thread Eurocentric - German centrism, and pro occidentalism!*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Pro-Occidentalism evolved from the British Empire and conquest of the known world.  It came on the heels of the Spanish Empire and conquest of the Western Hemisphere.
> 
> German evolution as far as we can tell is from Persia according to Herodotus who also calls the Persians and Indians "Aryans".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This did not imply that they were proto Germanic, but Arians as originating from Saharasian territories (certainly not Europe)
> 
> The Indo-Europeans, blondes vanguards, Giovanni Semerano:
> 
> They must have conspired linguists learned, clearly offspring: [We have to give a name to the messengers of the origins. They can not be eco vain as all the echoes. Li will say Indo giving them an industrious] personality.
> Among many they chose the name that says a blatant impropriety, Indo-European, combining two words of different meaning: ethnic and geographical. Wing wider than that team was in the escort Hittites, who with myeloma emphasis were called "Blondes avant-garde." In such distorted mirrors have stocks these heroic avant-garde,
> in an antique mirror of red copper or the bottom of a brazier of the same metal, it is especially sealed and hidden.
> "Blondes vanguard"! Now when rhetoric squats on a page like the lion after the meal, farewell to the good intentions of being relevant to the theme in an exhibition performance. Here catches me the need to remember that my latest writing is part of the cycle of my works that aim to confirm the historical insight: a bond of cultural brotherhood league for five thousand years Europe to 'the West, Mesopotamia, today's Iraq where flourished unreachable civilizations, cultures of Sumer, Akkad, Babylon; It is still alive the charm of that cradle of the arts, the sciences, of the Law.
> The vanguard of that world came down to us: the big dial of the story had sounded the hour of Sargon the Great; we are in the third millennium BC Invincible leader, had put in precipitating leaks armies who wanted to prevent his march; He came to the Mediterranean and [washed his weapons in his Upper] Sea, as he says. It 's almost unnecessary to add that Sargon is the founder of the dynasty of Akkad, so she told her Akkadian language, with other languages of the Semitic race, he has brought much light to our knowledge.
> The Indo-conception had not yet flowered in linguists head. What relationships have the story of Sargon with our history ??
> In an ancient stele, Sargon, King of Battle, as he was called, presents its peoples pretty much in these terms: "I am Sargon [...] There I met my father; my mother was a priestess; I produced, I He puts in a basket that sealed it with pitch; set me down on the river that submerged me and I was not floated at home dell'innaffiatore Aqqi ".
> But all this evokes the birth of Romulus and Remus: also sons of a priestess; They never knew his father; also places a basket, presumably smeared with pitch, placed on the river and then driven to the house of the shepherd Faustulus.
> Then, adults, Romulus killed Remus; and also in the home of Sargon, after his death, his son Rimush had been killed in a conspiracy of his brother indulged palace.
> It should be just remember that Remo and Rimush names are Hypocorism voice Akkadian rimu "loved". The Akkadian name presents an anaphoric - sb (- š). So ancient shadows, ancient glories back down to us from the East to add to those of our own world.
> 
> The fairytale Indo-European.
Click to expand...


Indo-European means from India-Europe.  This is the definition of Aryan.


----------



## yiostheoy

irosie91 said:


> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Gabriel was plagiarized by Mo.  You did not get what I was explaining.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sure I did-------I just happen to be fond of Gabriel and KNOW that he has no time for playing------academic cheating.    Gabriel is in charge of all kinds of  GUARD
> MISSIONS-------and even a few  hand to hand brawls
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, Gabriel was Michael's bodyguard on the trip to Sodom and Gomorrah and he is also the messenger to Abraham and Mary.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> busy guy ------with important work-------I doubt he had much time to hang
> out in a bat cave with  an illiterate  Bedouin in arabia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are anthropological theories that Mo never existed but was invented by Zoroastrians in Egypt trying to reform Zoroastrianism.  Hence they invented Islam -- sort of like the Protestant Reformation re-invented Catholicism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Zoroastrians in Egypt invented  MO?      Maybe you are trying to say that
> Zoroastrians in Arabia invented Mo  (???)
Click to expand...

Not Arabia.  Arabs had not yet begun the Arab conquest.

It was either Egypt or Baghdad where Islam was invented out of the blue.


----------



## yiostheoy

irosie91 said:


> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> A lot of modern archaeology and anthropology validates the existence of Moses.  However we still don't know where he got his stories from.  He did not properly document his sources.  He could have, but it would have undermined his story about being an all powerful messenger of YHVH.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do not remember him saying     I AM AN ALL POWERFUL MESSENGER OF FOUR LETTERS,  to wit    YHVH       Traditionally he is said to have communicated
> DIRECTLY  with    "GOD"       I do not believe that  Moses authored the  TORAH  (ie first five books of the bible-----all by himself)
Click to expand...

Well, like the Iliad and Odyssey, the Tenakh was probably embellished over the years.  I won't disagree with you there.

But I also don't doubt that Moses created the framework for the first 5 books.


----------



## historycisalpin

yiostheoy said:


> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> you made no point-------the human brain ----WORLD WIDE----is so constructed that all  HUMAN BRAINS have the capacity for spoken and even written language.   ----Eventually ALL HUMANS   do elaborate a language---spoken----and then in some ways SYMBOLIZED.      As to evidence of language----old evidence is the written stuff------Sanskrit is the major precursor of INDO EUROPEAN LANGUAGES-----
> 
> 
> 
> Leaving aside that lunatic's rantings, get yourself better informed:
> 
> Proto-Indo-European language - Wikipedia
> 
> It really is a fascinating topic although much of it is still theory.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Are theories from peanuts, protruding from the European academic corporatism and thread Eurocentric - German centrism, and pro occidentalism!*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Pro-Occidentalism evolved from the British Empire and conquest of the known world.  It came on the heels of the Spanish Empire and conquest of the Western Hemisphere.
> 
> German evolution as far as we can tell is from Persia according to Herodotus who also calls the Persians and Indians "Aryans".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This did not imply that they were proto Germanic, but Arians as originating from Saharasian territories (certainly not Europe)
> 
> The Indo-Europeans, blondes vanguards, Giovanni Semerano:
> 
> They must have conspired linguists learned, clearly offspring: [We have to give a name to the messengers of the origins. They can not be eco vain as all the echoes. Li will say Indo giving them an industrious] personality.
> Among many they chose the name that says a blatant impropriety, Indo-European, combining two words of different meaning: ethnic and geographical. Wing wider than that team was in the escort Hittites, who with myeloma emphasis were called "Blondes avant-garde." In such distorted mirrors have stocks these heroic avant-garde,
> in an antique mirror of red copper or the bottom of a brazier of the same metal, it is especially sealed and hidden.
> "Blondes vanguard"! Now when rhetoric squats on a page like the lion after the meal, farewell to the good intentions of being relevant to the theme in an exhibition performance. Here catches me the need to remember that my latest writing is part of the cycle of my works that aim to confirm the historical insight: a bond of cultural brotherhood league for five thousand years Europe to 'the West, Mesopotamia, today's Iraq where flourished unreachable civilizations, cultures of Sumer, Akkad, Babylon; It is still alive the charm of that cradle of the arts, the sciences, of the Law.
> The vanguard of that world came down to us: the big dial of the story had sounded the hour of Sargon the Great; we are in the third millennium BC Invincible leader, had put in precipitating leaks armies who wanted to prevent his march; He came to the Mediterranean and [washed his weapons in his Upper] Sea, as he says. It 's almost unnecessary to add that Sargon is the founder of the dynasty of Akkad, so she told her Akkadian language, with other languages of the Semitic race, he has brought much light to our knowledge.
> The Indo-conception had not yet flowered in linguists head. What relationships have the story of Sargon with our history ??
> In an ancient stele, Sargon, King of Battle, as he was called, presents its peoples pretty much in these terms: "I am Sargon [...] There I met my father; my mother was a priestess; I produced, I He puts in a basket that sealed it with pitch; set me down on the river that submerged me and I was not floated at home dell'innaffiatore Aqqi ".
> But all this evokes the birth of Romulus and Remus: also sons of a priestess; They never knew his father; also places a basket, presumably smeared with pitch, placed on the river and then driven to the house of the shepherd Faustulus.
> Then, adults, Romulus killed Remus; and also in the home of Sargon, after his death, his son Rimush had been killed in a conspiracy of his brother indulged palace.
> It should be just remember that Remo and Rimush names are Hypocorism voice Akkadian rimu "loved". The Akkadian name presents an anaphoric - sb (- š). So ancient shadows, ancient glories back down to us from the East to add to those of our own world.
> 
> The fairytale Indo-European.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Indo-European means from India-Europe.  This is the definition of Aryan.
Click to expand...


The correct definition would *Indo-Mesopotamic*, not Indo-""European""


----------



## yiostheoy

historycisalpin said:


> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> Leaving aside that lunatic's rantings, get yourself better informed:
> 
> Proto-Indo-European language - Wikipedia
> 
> It really is a fascinating topic although much of it is still theory.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Are theories from peanuts, protruding from the European academic corporatism and thread Eurocentric - German centrism, and pro occidentalism!*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Pro-Occidentalism evolved from the British Empire and conquest of the known world.  It came on the heels of the Spanish Empire and conquest of the Western Hemisphere.
> 
> German evolution as far as we can tell is from Persia according to Herodotus who also calls the Persians and Indians "Aryans".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This did not imply that they were proto Germanic, but Arians as originating from Saharasian territories (certainly not Europe)
> 
> The Indo-Europeans, blondes vanguards, Giovanni Semerano:
> 
> They must have conspired linguists learned, clearly offspring: [We have to give a name to the messengers of the origins. They can not be eco vain as all the echoes. Li will say Indo giving them an industrious] personality.
> Among many they chose the name that says a blatant impropriety, Indo-European, combining two words of different meaning: ethnic and geographical. Wing wider than that team was in the escort Hittites, who with myeloma emphasis were called "Blondes avant-garde." In such distorted mirrors have stocks these heroic avant-garde,
> in an antique mirror of red copper or the bottom of a brazier of the same metal, it is especially sealed and hidden.
> "Blondes vanguard"! Now when rhetoric squats on a page like the lion after the meal, farewell to the good intentions of being relevant to the theme in an exhibition performance. Here catches me the need to remember that my latest writing is part of the cycle of my works that aim to confirm the historical insight: a bond of cultural brotherhood league for five thousand years Europe to 'the West, Mesopotamia, today's Iraq where flourished unreachable civilizations, cultures of Sumer, Akkad, Babylon; It is still alive the charm of that cradle of the arts, the sciences, of the Law.
> The vanguard of that world came down to us: the big dial of the story had sounded the hour of Sargon the Great; we are in the third millennium BC Invincible leader, had put in precipitating leaks armies who wanted to prevent his march; He came to the Mediterranean and [washed his weapons in his Upper] Sea, as he says. It 's almost unnecessary to add that Sargon is the founder of the dynasty of Akkad, so she told her Akkadian language, with other languages of the Semitic race, he has brought much light to our knowledge.
> The Indo-conception had not yet flowered in linguists head. What relationships have the story of Sargon with our history ??
> In an ancient stele, Sargon, King of Battle, as he was called, presents its peoples pretty much in these terms: "I am Sargon [...] There I met my father; my mother was a priestess; I produced, I He puts in a basket that sealed it with pitch; set me down on the river that submerged me and I was not floated at home dell'innaffiatore Aqqi ".
> But all this evokes the birth of Romulus and Remus: also sons of a priestess; They never knew his father; also places a basket, presumably smeared with pitch, placed on the river and then driven to the house of the shepherd Faustulus.
> Then, adults, Romulus killed Remus; and also in the home of Sargon, after his death, his son Rimush had been killed in a conspiracy of his brother indulged palace.
> It should be just remember that Remo and Rimush names are Hypocorism voice Akkadian rimu "loved". The Akkadian name presents an anaphoric - sb (- š). So ancient shadows, ancient glories back down to us from the East to add to those of our own world.
> 
> The fairytale Indo-European.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Indo-European means from India-Europe.  This is the definition of Aryan.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The correct definition would *Indo-Mesopotamic*, not Indo-""European""
Click to expand...

The Mesopotamians were NOT Aryan -- they were Semites.


----------



## historycisalpin

yiostheoy said:


> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Are theories from peanuts, protruding from the European academic corporatism and thread Eurocentric - German centrism, and pro occidentalism!*
> 
> 
> 
> Pro-Occidentalism evolved from the British Empire and conquest of the known world.  It came on the heels of the Spanish Empire and conquest of the Western Hemisphere.
> 
> German evolution as far as we can tell is from Persia according to Herodotus who also calls the Persians and Indians "Aryans".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This did not imply that they were proto Germanic, but Arians as originating from Saharasian territories (certainly not Europe)
> 
> The Indo-Europeans, blondes vanguards, Giovanni Semerano:
> 
> They must have conspired linguists learned, clearly offspring: [We have to give a name to the messengers of the origins. They can not be eco vain as all the echoes. Li will say Indo giving them an industrious] personality.
> Among many they chose the name that says a blatant impropriety, Indo-European, combining two words of different meaning: ethnic and geographical. Wing wider than that team was in the escort Hittites, who with myeloma emphasis were called "Blondes avant-garde." In such distorted mirrors have stocks these heroic avant-garde,
> in an antique mirror of red copper or the bottom of a brazier of the same metal, it is especially sealed and hidden.
> "Blondes vanguard"! Now when rhetoric squats on a page like the lion after the meal, farewell to the good intentions of being relevant to the theme in an exhibition performance. Here catches me the need to remember that my latest writing is part of the cycle of my works that aim to confirm the historical insight: a bond of cultural brotherhood league for five thousand years Europe to 'the West, Mesopotamia, today's Iraq where flourished unreachable civilizations, cultures of Sumer, Akkad, Babylon; It is still alive the charm of that cradle of the arts, the sciences, of the Law.
> The vanguard of that world came down to us: the big dial of the story had sounded the hour of Sargon the Great; we are in the third millennium BC Invincible leader, had put in precipitating leaks armies who wanted to prevent his march; He came to the Mediterranean and [washed his weapons in his Upper] Sea, as he says. It 's almost unnecessary to add that Sargon is the founder of the dynasty of Akkad, so she told her Akkadian language, with other languages of the Semitic race, he has brought much light to our knowledge.
> The Indo-conception had not yet flowered in linguists head. What relationships have the story of Sargon with our history ??
> In an ancient stele, Sargon, King of Battle, as he was called, presents its peoples pretty much in these terms: "I am Sargon [...] There I met my father; my mother was a priestess; I produced, I He puts in a basket that sealed it with pitch; set me down on the river that submerged me and I was not floated at home dell'innaffiatore Aqqi ".
> But all this evokes the birth of Romulus and Remus: also sons of a priestess; They never knew his father; also places a basket, presumably smeared with pitch, placed on the river and then driven to the house of the shepherd Faustulus.
> Then, adults, Romulus killed Remus; and also in the home of Sargon, after his death, his son Rimush had been killed in a conspiracy of his brother indulged palace.
> It should be just remember that Remo and Rimush names are Hypocorism voice Akkadian rimu "loved". The Akkadian name presents an anaphoric - sb (- š). So ancient shadows, ancient glories back down to us from the East to add to those of our own world.
> 
> The fairytale Indo-European.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Indo-European means from India-Europe.  This is the definition of Aryan.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The correct definition would *Indo-Mesopotamic*, not Indo-""European""
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Mesopotamians were NOT Aryan -- they were Semites.
Click to expand...


Exactly !! europe was invaded and colonized by people of Indo-Mesopotamian lineage - Saharasian, throughout history, and this colonization was far much more effective (on the  ethnic-anthropological level - religious and socio-cultural), than they had in the native Europeans middle eastern territories of the Levantine Saharasia.

I think that the theories of James DeMeo are correct, you should at least from them in order to arrive at a certainty


----------



## irosie91

yiostheoy said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> sure I did-------I just happen to be fond of Gabriel and KNOW that he has no time for playing------academic cheating.    Gabriel is in charge of all kinds of  GUARD
> MISSIONS-------and even a few  hand to hand brawls
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, Gabriel was Michael's bodyguard on the trip to Sodom and Gomorrah and he is also the messenger to Abraham and Mary.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> busy guy ------with important work-------I doubt he had much time to hang
> out in a bat cave with  an illiterate  Bedouin in arabia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are anthropological theories that Mo never existed but was invented by Zoroastrians in Egypt trying to reform Zoroastrianism.  Hence they invented Islam -- sort of like the Protestant Reformation re-invented Catholicism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Zoroastrians in Egypt invented  MO?      Maybe you are trying to say that
> Zoroastrians in Arabia invented Mo  (???)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not Arabia.  Arabs had not yet begun the Arab conquest.
> 
> It was either Egypt or Baghdad where Islam was invented out of the blue.
Click to expand...


what are you calling  "islam" -----something not related to the history detailed in the Koran?


----------



## yiostheoy

irosie91 said:


> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, Gabriel was Michael's bodyguard on the trip to Sodom and Gomorrah and he is also the messenger to Abraham and Mary.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busy guy ------with important work-------I doubt he had much time to hang
> out in a bat cave with  an illiterate  Bedouin in arabia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are anthropological theories that Mo never existed but was invented by Zoroastrians in Egypt trying to reform Zoroastrianism.  Hence they invented Islam -- sort of like the Protestant Reformation re-invented Catholicism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Zoroastrians in Egypt invented  MO?      Maybe you are trying to say that
> Zoroastrians in Arabia invented Mo  (???)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not Arabia.  Arabs had not yet begun the Arab conquest.
> 
> It was either Egypt or Baghdad where Islam was invented out of the blue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> what are you calling  "islam" -----something not related to the history detailed in the Koran?
Click to expand...

They have their fiction book called the Quran.

Their actual history is shrouded in Zoroastrianism however.

I don't know why the authors plagiarized Biblical names like "Gabriel" though.  Allah was fine -- that's a good mythical and unique character who harkens back to Akkad.  But "Gabriel" is pure plagiarism.


----------



## historycisalpin

The fact is that Judaism, Christianity and Islam are all monotheistic religions of Abrahamic origin, then Semitic/Saharasian.

Many biblical stories come from ancient Mesopotamian mythological legacies, like Lilith, the first Eve, but also the Garden of Eden comes from mythology Sumerian, the Great Flood has some similarities to the Babylonian myth of the epic of Gilgamesh and so on ...

The same is also true for most of the ancient pagan gods of Etruscan - Greek and Roman, which were introduced from Mesopotamia always.


----------



## yiostheoy

historycisalpin said:


> The fact is that Judaism, Christianity and Islam are all monotheistic religions of Abrahamic origin, then Semitic/Saharasian.
> 
> Many biblical stories come from ancient Mesopotamian mythological legacies, like Lilith, the first Eve, but also the Garden of Eden comes from mythology Sumerian, the Great Flood has some similarities to the Babylonian myth of the epic of Gilgamesh and so on ...
> 
> The same is also true for most of the ancient pagan gods of Etruscan - Greek and Roman, which were introduced from Mesopotamia always.


I don't think you know what a fact is.

Islam believes in Allah.

Judaism believes in YHVH.

Christianity believes in Dynamos, Iesous, and Pneuma Agia.

How good is your math?

Can you count to 3 ??


----------



## historycisalpin

Yahweh, the Iddio and Allah, are merely three names for one and the same deity. The Bible and the Koran are derived from the Hebrew Torah, which is the text sacred par excellence that underpin the three main monotheistic religions.

They not at all the Abrahamic religions, are called such, precisely because their claim Abraham as the father of sacred history.

Even the orthodox religion is a branch which is part of the same plant.

.


----------



## Picaro

irosie91 said:


> Picaro said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> the oldest indo European language is SANSKRIT
> 
> 
> 
> ALPHABET! FFS, AN ALPHABET IS NOT A LANGUAGE!
> 
> People spoke before they developed alphabets to symbolize speech.
> 
> Does anybody get this?!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you made no point-------the human brain ----WORLD WIDE----is so constructed that all  HUMAN BRAINS have the capacity for spoken and even written language.   ----Eventually ALL HUMANS   do elaborate a language---spoken----and then in some ways SYMBOLIZED.      As to evidence of language----old evidence is the written stuff------Sanskrit is the major precursor of INDO EUROPEAN LANGUAGES-----
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Leaving aside that lunatic's rantings, get yourself better informed:
> 
> Proto-Indo-European language - Wikipedia
> 
> It really is a fascinating topic although much of it is still theory.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Written symbols have been around a while; languages like Sanskrit that are both spoken and written are what I would limit the discussion to.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is reasonable in discussing ancient languages to discuss those that were
> either written or recorded in someway AVAILABLE to us now------it works out
> better
Click to expand...


Some of the earliest symbol writings are only 'languages' in the sense that mathematics is a 'language', i.e. they were more about accounting and record keeping than for all around communication,  which is why a distinction should be made in some cases. They aren't useful as story-telling methods or conveying abstract concepts or identification of ideas and culture. While such accounting can tell us a lot about what they ate or traded or whatever, they aren't useful for much else, any more than a business account book can describe an entire culture.


----------



## Picaro

yiostheoy said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historycisalpin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The DNA  studies do not indicate that the ancient Egyptians were "BLACK"---or green or blue or white and pink
> 
> 
> 
> 
> were certainly not European or proto European
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Europeans were Aryan who came from Aryana Afghanistan.  From there they spread to Persia, India, Russia, and Europe.
> 
> We don't know where the Egyptians came from.  It seems that they were always in Egypt as best history and archaeology tells us.  They could have been dark like the Ethiopians or they could have been caramel like the Arabs and Berbers.
> 
> The Assyrians and Babylonians were yet a third group who came from the area of what is today Syria and Iraq.
> 
> Moses tells us a neat story in his Tenakh that these 3 groups are from the 3 sons of Noah (a mystical flood actor taken from the story of Gilgamesh) with their respective different racial wives.  But where Moses got this story from he does not tell us.  Moses was a storyteller not an historian nor an archaeologist or anthropologist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is not at all clear to me that  Moses wrote the whole first five books.   I do not
> believe he just INVENTED stuff------the stuff in the first  book seems to be
> traditional belief-------lots of that a guy like Abraham would have brought from
> "UR"   ------somewhere in Iraq-----near the two rivers-----that it seems-----liked to flood the place now and them and------actually had a written language.   The traditional belief is that  Abraham was literate.-------
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I DO believe Moses invented stuff.  All evidence points to it.
> 
> We are told by himself and by Josephus that Moses was raised as a Prince Of Egypt and as such he would have been well educated by temple scribes.  Moses seems to have adapted elements of ancient history prior to himself into his own stories -- their Gods, demons, a flood, river infanticide, and so forth.  He mentions the Hittites and we have since discovered archaeology about the Hittites.  He could not have made this up.  And the Jews could not have made it up either.
> 
> Whether it was a sky god named YHVH or schizophrenia that compelled Moses to lead the Hebrews out of Egypt we will never know.  But once he did it the Hebrews became quite hostile towards him and so he had to invent stories to keep them under control.
> 
> That he did.
Click to expand...


Why would he have not used the 'known' history common to the culture he was raised and educated in? This isn't 'stealing', and not everything in the Bible is theology, much is history as they knew it then as well as religion and mythology. Does the U.S. have to invent a history fro France in order to fit it's own history? Would we be 'stealing' if our history of France matches a lot of what French historians accept as accurate? What is clear is the authors of these works were not morons nor idiots, they were very intelligent and very good at the use of literary devices and logic; it matters little to scholarship whether Moses himself wrote a single word, it is the concept that matters, and those books are deliberately designed to convey several levels of thought and greater lessons.

'Literalism' is not the same as 'Fundamentalism'; this is a distinction both religious fanatics and 'new atheists' both can't ever seem to make when it comes to explaining such a sophisticated theological treatise like the Old and New Testaments. These aren't stories by people who knew everything there was to know, nor are they ever portrayed as such. they are invariably portrayed as weak, 'sinful' people who have to be guided to 'greatness', and aren't Super Humans or Gods walking the Earth. This along with monotheism are the great intellectual leaps Judaism makes that distinguished it from the animists and other 'religions' in the region.


----------



## irosie91

Picaro said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Picaro said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> ALPHABET! FFS, AN ALPHABET IS NOT A LANGUAGE!
> 
> People spoke before they developed alphabets to symbolize speech.
> 
> Does anybody get this?!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you made no point-------the human brain ----WORLD WIDE----is so constructed that all  HUMAN BRAINS have the capacity for spoken and even written language.   ----Eventually ALL HUMANS   do elaborate a language---spoken----and then in some ways SYMBOLIZED.      As to evidence of language----old evidence is the written stuff------Sanskrit is the major precursor of INDO EUROPEAN LANGUAGES-----
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Leaving aside that lunatic's rantings, get yourself better informed:
> 
> Proto-Indo-European language - Wikipedia
> 
> It really is a fascinating topic although much of it is still theory.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Written symbols have been around a while; languages like Sanskrit that are both spoken and written are what I would limit the discussion to.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is reasonable in discussing ancient languages to discuss those that were
> either written or recorded in someway AVAILABLE to us now------it works out
> better
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Some of the earliest symbol writings are only 'languages' in the sense that mathematics is a 'language', i.e. they were more about accounting and record keeping than for all around communication,  which is why a distinction should be made in some cases. They aren't useful as story-telling methods or conveying abstract concepts or identification of ideas and culture. While such accounting can tell us a lot about what they ate or traded or whatever, they aren't useful for much else, any more than a business account book can describe an entire culture.
Click to expand...


yes----very primitive manifestations of the use of symbols for record
keeping DO RELATE TO TRADE AND TIME AND RECORDS OF 
"STUFF"------so?      what is your point?.      ------in fact----even that
stuff is mediated by the part of the brain that mediates language----
it;s all there POTENTIALLY-----even in pre-literate bedouins


----------



## irosie91

yiostheoy said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> busy guy ------with important work-------I doubt he had much time to hang
> out in a bat cave with  an illiterate  Bedouin in arabia
> 
> 
> 
> There are anthropological theories that Mo never existed but was invented by Zoroastrians in Egypt trying to reform Zoroastrianism.  Hence they invented Islam -- sort of like the Protestant Reformation re-invented Catholicism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Zoroastrians in Egypt invented  MO?      Maybe you are trying to say that
> Zoroastrians in Arabia invented Mo  (???)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not Arabia.  Arabs had not yet begun the Arab conquest.
> 
> It was either Egypt or Baghdad where Islam was invented out of the blue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> what are you calling  "islam" -----something not related to the history detailed in the Koran?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They have their fiction book called the Quran.
> 
> Their actual history is shrouded in Zoroastrianism however.
> 
> I don't know why the authors plagiarized Biblical names like "Gabriel" though.  Allah was fine -- that's a good mythical and unique character who harkens back to Akkad.  But "Gabriel" is pure plagiarism.
Click to expand...


what does  "their actual history is shrouded in Zorostrianism"   mean   ??????


----------



## yiostheoy

irosie91 said:


> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> There are anthropological theories that Mo never existed but was invented by Zoroastrians in Egypt trying to reform Zoroastrianism.  Hence they invented Islam -- sort of like the Protestant Reformation re-invented Catholicism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zoroastrians in Egypt invented  MO?      Maybe you are trying to say that
> Zoroastrians in Arabia invented Mo  (???)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not Arabia.  Arabs had not yet begun the Arab conquest.
> 
> It was either Egypt or Baghdad where Islam was invented out of the blue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> what are you calling  "islam" -----something not related to the history detailed in the Koran?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They have their fiction book called the Quran.
> 
> Their actual history is shrouded in Zoroastrianism however.
> 
> I don't know why the authors plagiarized Biblical names like "Gabriel" though.  Allah was fine -- that's a good mythical and unique character who harkens back to Akkad.  But "Gabriel" is pure plagiarism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> what does  "their actual history is shrouded in Zorostrianism"   mean   ??????
Click to expand...

Let's meet over a beer somewhere and I will explain it all to you.


----------



## yiostheoy

historycisalpin said:


> Yahweh, the Iddio and Allah, are merely three names for one and the same deity. The Bible and the Koran are derived from the Hebrew Torah, which is the text sacred par excellence that underpin the three main monotheistic religions.
> 
> They not at all the Abrahamic religions, are called such, precisely because their claim Abraham as the father of sacred history.
> 
> Even the orthodox religion is a branch which is part of the same plant.
> 
> .


YHVH and Dynamos yes, maybe.

Allah is a fictional character however.


----------



## irosie91

yiostheoy said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Zoroastrians in Egypt invented  MO?      Maybe you are trying to say that
> Zoroastrians in Arabia invented Mo  (???)
> 
> 
> 
> Not Arabia.  Arabs had not yet begun the Arab conquest.
> 
> It was either Egypt or Baghdad where Islam was invented out of the blue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> what are you calling  "islam" -----something not related to the history detailed in the Koran?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They have their fiction book called the Quran.
> 
> Their actual history is shrouded in Zoroastrianism however.
> 
> I don't know why the authors plagiarized Biblical names like "Gabriel" though.  Allah was fine -- that's a good mythical and unique character who harkens back to Akkad.  But "Gabriel" is pure plagiarism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> what does  "their actual history is shrouded in Zorostrianism"   mean   ??????
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's meet over a beer somewhere and I will explain it all to you.
Click to expand...


I never drink beer------it tastes like dish detergent


----------



## yiostheoy

irosie91 said:


> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not Arabia.  Arabs had not yet begun the Arab conquest.
> 
> It was either Egypt or Baghdad where Islam was invented out of the blue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> what are you calling  "islam" -----something not related to the history detailed in the Koran?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They have their fiction book called the Quran.
> 
> Their actual history is shrouded in Zoroastrianism however.
> 
> I don't know why the authors plagiarized Biblical names like "Gabriel" though.  Allah was fine -- that's a good mythical and unique character who harkens back to Akkad.  But "Gabriel" is pure plagiarism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> what does  "their actual history is shrouded in Zorostrianism"   mean   ??????
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's meet over a beer somewhere and I will explain it all to you.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I never drink beer------it tastes like dish detergent
Click to expand...

Ok pinot noir, or pinot gregio then.


----------



## irosie91

yiostheoy said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> what are you calling  "islam" -----something not related to the history detailed in the Koran?
> 
> 
> 
> They have their fiction book called the Quran.
> 
> Their actual history is shrouded in Zoroastrianism however.
> 
> I don't know why the authors plagiarized Biblical names like "Gabriel" though.  Allah was fine -- that's a good mythical and unique character who harkens back to Akkad.  But "Gabriel" is pure plagiarism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> what does  "their actual history is shrouded in Zorostrianism"   mean   ??????
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's meet over a beer somewhere and I will explain it all to you.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I never drink beer------it tastes like dish detergent
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ok pinot noir, or pinot gregio then.
Click to expand...


try hard----give me a hint on this     "their actual history is shrouded in
Zoroastrianism"   ------I do not find your assertion sensible.    There were
some Zoroastrians in Arabia------after-all----mecca was on the "silk road" 
at that time.    The script that got developed for Arabic is derived from
Farsi script---------OK        I assume your  "their"  is the arabs of Arabia----
the ones who developed islam------so you have written   "the history of early
muslims is shrouded in Zoroastrianism"  <?????>


----------



## irosie91

yiostheoy said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> A lot of modern archaeology and anthropology validates the existence of Moses.  However we still don't know where he got his stories from.  He did not properly document his sources.  He could have, but it would have undermined his story about being an all powerful messenger of YHVH.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do not remember him saying     I AM AN ALL POWERFUL MESSENGER OF FOUR LETTERS,  to wit    YHVH       Traditionally he is said to have communicated
> DIRECTLY  with    "GOD"       I do not believe that  Moses authored the  TORAH  (ie first five books of the bible-----all by himself)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well, like the Iliad and Odyssey, the Tenakh was probably embellished over the years.  I won't disagree with you there.
> 
> But I also don't doubt that Moses created the framework for the first 5 books.
Click to expand...


from where did you get the idea that Homer's Odyssey was altered over the
years?  -----gotta link?


----------



## Picaro

irosie91 said:


> Picaro said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Picaro said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> you made no point-------the human brain ----WORLD WIDE----is so constructed that all  HUMAN BRAINS have the capacity for spoken and even written language.   ----Eventually ALL HUMANS   do elaborate a language---spoken----and then in some ways SYMBOLIZED.      As to evidence of language----old evidence is the written stuff------Sanskrit is the major precursor of INDO EUROPEAN LANGUAGES-----
> 
> 
> 
> Leaving aside that lunatic's rantings, get yourself better informed:
> 
> Proto-Indo-European language - Wikipedia
> 
> It really is a fascinating topic although much of it is still theory.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Written symbols have been around a while; languages like Sanskrit that are both spoken and written are what I would limit the discussion to.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is reasonable in discussing ancient languages to discuss those that were
> either written or recorded in someway AVAILABLE to us now------it works out
> better
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Some of the earliest symbol writings are only 'languages' in the sense that mathematics is a 'language', i.e. they were more about accounting and record keeping than for all around communication,  which is why a distinction should be made in some cases. They aren't useful as story-telling methods or conveying abstract concepts or identification of ideas and culture. While such accounting can tell us a lot about what they ate or traded or whatever, they aren't useful for much else, any more than a business account book can describe an entire culture.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> yes----very primitive manifestations of the use of symbols for record
> keeping DO RELATE TO TRADE AND TIME AND RECORDS OF
> "STUFF"------so?      what is your point?.      ------in fact----even that
> stuff is mediated by the part of the brain that mediates language----
> it;s all there POTENTIALLY-----even in pre-literate bedouins
Click to expand...


the 'point' is they aren't in the same league as a developed language like Sanskrit, and not useful outside of a narrow function; nobody wrote speeches, histories, or literature and the like with it. That 'point' should be obvious.


----------

