Ultimate White Power

Some certainly are however it is a fact that Egypt was invaded by many groups primarily from Southern Europe and Southwest Asia during the Greco-Roman and Islamic periods which probably contributed significantly to the gene pool.

[video=dailymotion;x2rmc71]http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2rmc71[/video]

[video=youtube;ZvJ0F299kFQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZvJ0F299kFQ[/video]

 

Everyone has access to technology today. I don't see any reason we can't compare groups of one another in the present.

 

But, modern Egyptians are mostly E1b1b, they're not very J haplogroup like Arabs, and heavily lack R1b like Southern Europeans.

To make things more confusing actually Nubians of Northern Sudan have more J haplogroups, and R1b haplogroups than Egyptians.
(Which would support these are mostly ancient, and not from Arab, or Greco-Roman invaders)

- - - Updated - - -

What about all the Black slaves taken to Egypt during the Arab slave trade?

 

Even Ukrainians Europe's most oppressed group has had way more contributions in modern times than non-Whites, unless you include Japanese, and Ashkenazi Jews.

Ukrainians made up some of the best rocket scientists like Korolev, Glushko, Chelomey,Kybalchich, and Kondratyuk.

Ukrainian Ivan Puluj discovered X-rays.

Of course some others too.

Why can't non-Whites usually do this?

 

Don't forget Egypt spoke an Afro-Asiatic language before it became Arab, and Arabs also spoke an Afro-Asiatic language too.

The main question then would be did Afro-Asiatic languages spread from West Asia, or from North Africa, or from East Africa?

 

The first North Africans were Caucasoid anyways, they were called Mechta - Afalou or Mechtoids.

 

er, zieg baby zieg was a sarcastic dig at the untermenschen reference in a post in this thread. One that can only be construed as yet another white racist piece of garbage.

 

Just a "hunch" from a Bible instead of Independent research?

 

Maybe they are just being infidel, protestant, and renegade to it, due to a lack of a superior argument, for it.

everybody knows, Catholics don't mind bailing out Protestants, and their work ethic.

 

We still don't know all of the geological record, which may have induced migration from one point to another.

- - - Updated - - -

It would be a different species if not arising from the "original" group of humans.

And, what you are claiming, is simply "back and forth" migration patterns.

 

How similar are species in the Galapagos, when compared to those from the "mainlands".

 

Ust'-Ishim man belonged to mtDNA haplogroup R* and Y-DNA haplogroup K2* (K-M256). Today, 27-29% of indigenous Australian males carry haplogroup K2* and Ust'-Ishim man was genetically close to Aboriginal Australians. However, the Ust’-Ishim genome has no evidence of ancestry from the Denisovan population, which is common among Melanesians (up to 8%). Ust'-Ishim man also shared mtDNA haplogroup R* with the modern Indian population as haplogroup R* and its descendant haplogroups are common in India, especially among the castes and southern regions.

 

Here is what the Earth is supposed to have looked like, around two hundred forty million years ago:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geological_history_of_Earth#/media/File:249_global.png

 

Several problems here. Let's start from the bottom up.

World's Oldest Wheel Found in Slovenia? Nope. If you read the article, you'll find that it is the oldest wooden wheel found. And if you look age provided, it isn't quite as old as the stone wheels we've found around Sumer.

Next link is about the oldest image of a wheel . . . and the image itself is only about as old as the wheels of Sumer. Still no dice.

Top link? He doesn't really substantiate most of the dates he provides, but even if they are correct . . . those wheels are still about as old as the wheels of Sumer. Only the toy they mention would be a significant find in that regard, and no source is given for the dates. Plus, if a toy with wheels counts, then Native Americans developed the wheel before ever meeting a European.

As for the other link you gave for the linguistic link . . . maybe, but from what I've read, Proto-Indo-European language itself is only about as old as the Sumerian wheel, so I see that argument as pretty weak. Plus, why give the credit to white Europeans? What about the non-white, non-European Indo-European civilizations like Indians and Persians?

I'm not here arguing that Sumer invented the idea of the wheel and everyone borrowed it from them. I don't know that I've ever seen a historian argue that. More than likely, like writing, the bow and arrow and countless other developments, it was probably developed independently in multiple locations. It appears around Sumerian, Cucuteni-Trypillian and other civilizations at roughly the same time.

 

If any race was to be argued superior to all others, it would probably to be north east Asians. Your bog standard Mongol - aka Japanese or Chinese.

But I don't believe race is relevant AT ALL. As far as I'm concerned, culture is the determiner of 'superiority', not skin/hair/eye colour.

 

What about brain size or frontal lobe surface area?