Take a look at the crural index of modern Egyptians before you decide to wave those figures around ignorantly. I have it here; different study but there you go.
American white 82.6% Modern Egyptian 84.9% American Black 85.25%
It’s just shorter than a black Americans, coincidentally about the same as the ancient Egyptians. How inconvenient for you. I have that study you pasted around here somewhere too, I’ve had it it waved at me so many times by people that never thought to compare what the modern length is. You ‘conveniently’ leave out middle Easterners and modern North Africans. They have much longer limbs than Europeans: for example;
Belgium 82.5% Yugoslav 83.75% Egyptian 84.9%
As you can see it lengthens as you move South. Egyptians were Egyptians, not white Americans who mainly come from Northern Europe.
I never said once that Egyptian culture was an import, that’s just something you like to think I said. The cultural aspects come from the Badari culture in upper Egypt. However, the farming arrived from the near East. If you Keita properly you’ll spot in his dissection of Lucottes Y chromosome study that he points out that modern Egyptians are mainly the same population that’s been there since the Pleistocence-something you lot like to ignore.
In a section about Egypt..
current inhabitants of the Nile valley should be understood as being in the main, although not wholly, descendants of the pre-neolithic regional inhabitants
You also like to pretend that Caucasoid people are newcomers to North Africa, when Keita himself observes the in the Mahgreb. And Keitas ‘tropical African’s are all groups with mixed Eurasian and African ancestry, and he never once makes any comment about the skin tone of his tropical Africans, and if you read his work properly it becomes clear he regards modern Egyptians as mainly indigenous Africans, and even ‘tropical’. BTW, his study of Badarian crania does not apply to lower Egyptians, he (and many others) have observed the Northern population was halfway between his tropical African (half Eurasian in ancestry) and European phenotypes. Whic would match the current population pretty closely.
As a brief exlporation of modern upper Egyptian st Y/mt DNA that you like to overlook: they are about 80% native African Y chromosomes, and maternally 47% Native African (if you are so desperate to claim M1 as African I’ll humour you here), with another 35% traceable to over 12,000 year in North Africa. So less than 20% of the upper Egyptian population is ‘non very ancient in Africa’, and most of the rest traces to the Neolithic. So exactly what genectic trace did your ‘theiving Arabs and slaves’ leave? None, because there weren’t any. Even lower Egypt is 60% native African.
EGYPTIANS ARE NATIVE AFRICANS.
That piece of text you pasted tried to claim all the mt DNA samples were sub Saharan - which is bullshit. Keita says the other lineages may be African too - he has no idea and is chucking out a guess, which is represented as a cast iron fact there. Eurasian DNA in North Africa dates back in two waves to over 30k, and over 12k, and they had to pass through Egypt.
After that long ramble about teeth:
Nubians group with other North Africans for teeth, and crania, and are technically Caucasoid, although dark skinned (but so are Indians). These are the people currently living in Southern Egypt, just up river. They have a clinal variation along the river. Brace also says that there’s no connection to sub-Saharan Africa with dynastic Egyptians or Nubians - forgot that Sundita?
The Predynastic of Upper Egypt
and the Late Dynastic of Lower Egypt are more closely related to each other
than to any other population. As a whole, they show ties with the European
Neolithic, North Africa, modern Europe, and, more remotely, India, but not
at all with sub-Saharan Africa, eastern Asia, Oceania, or the New World.
Adjacent people in the Nile valley show similarities in trivial traits in an
unbroken series from the delta in the north southward through Nubia and
all the way to Somalia a t the equator. At the same time, the gradient in skin
color and body proportions suggests long-term adaptive response to selec-
tive forces appropriate t o the latitude where they occur. An assessment of
“race” is as useless as it is impossible. Neither clines nor clusters alone
suffice to deal with the biological nature of a widely distributed population.
Both must be used. We conclude that the Egyptians have been in place since
back in the Pleistocene and have been largely unaffected by either inva-
sions or migrations. As others have noted, Egyptians are Egyptians, and
they were so in the past as well.
http://wysinger.homestead.com/brace.pdf
Nubians are closely related to upper Egyptians, and hang off the North African and caucasoid twig. Egyptian teeth and Nubian teeth are typically North African, and very different to the teeth of even East Africans, who have a substantial amount of Eurasian ancestry in them (as do/did Nubians), and very different to sub Saharan Africans.
M1 is African, it is derived directly from African L3, there is nothing Eurasian about it.
Even though several published papers trace it ancestrally to Asia now. And the stage missing isn’t found in Africa. That L3a in Senegal isn’t missing a step, it’s not M as you seem to think. No publishing author puts M down as African in origin, and lines ancestral to African M1 are found in the near East. the reason you kick up a fuss about M1 is becasue it ‘contaminates’ your ancient and modern East Africans with Eurasian ancestry. This is born from your racism, and nothing else.
Egypt and East Africa share M1 beccause it passed through Egypt on its way to East Africa, along with the m78 Y chromsome. Stop lying when you claim its from East Africa, none of the papers that looked at M1 came to that conclusion.
Wrong… You’re a novice who doesn’t know how to cite sources. I never said modern Egyptians were newcomers. I stated that they have new genes in many instances. If you have Eurasian genes on the one hand, like VII, which is at a high frequency in Eurasians, yet you also have African lineages, the question to ask is which came first and which predominated in ancient times. The answer is obvious since it correlates with MtDNA. M1 is African, it is derived directly from African L3, there is nothing Eurasian about it. The first people to carry the lineage were from sub-Saharan Africa as the gene is around 50,000 years old. Whites/Eurasian didn’t even exist at that time. lol!!! Nice try..
I wasn’t writing a scientific paper, I was pointing out how much crap that article was. Want to provide total refences for all your stuff? Names and quotes from the Irish paper that are relevant then. I’d also like to see a recent published paper that says M1 is African in origin (good luck with that one) and where it says some magical mutation completely altered the phenotype of Egyptians. You also might want to look up the age of the L3 and M mutations as you seem a bit unfamiliar with them.. M about 70k last estimate, and it goes up to 87k in some papers. L3 is substantially older than 50k. Eurasian remains are found dating to 90k and older Israel. So yes, there were Eurasians 50K ago, although they wouldn’t fit any modern racial group. I’ll give you a hint about the OOA date, modern humans were in China about 70k ago, in Oz nearly 60k ago. The estimated date need to be 95kat least, and if M is about 60 to 87k, that would locate it in Asia.
So..let me get this straight. You are claiming that my observation (which is shared by most people including Keita) that modern Egyptians have been in situ for thousands of years is right.. but that they magically changed appearance after the dynastic when a few Arabs appeared in the historical era and spread some master gene that turned them from black to standard North African in a few hundred years, even though the hair, teeth and art from the dynastic prortraits and crania all match the current population very closely.
So they are genetically the same but magically swapped race?
So that’s how you get around the fact the modern Egyptians are all natives of North Africa but are inconveniently not black.