YES!!!! Nubia-Kemet (aka Egypt) Is Where We ("Niger-Congo"-Bantus) Came From..Own It

[Asante]

Mesopotamian civilizations traded with, fought against, and interbred with African civilizations. There was clear migration back and forth​

​

All of that may be true, but the ultimate origin of Sumerian civilization is the result of various Africoid populations migrating from Northeastern Africa. There are Niger-Congo speaking populations with oral traditions of living in Sumeria, and several linguist have noted that Sumerian has Bantu elements in it.

and, 1177 BC, but your argument is that Africans created Mesopotamian (and American) civilizations and that's just patently false.

Sumer was founded by Nubians, and enough evidence presented here that you have not addressed has validated that claim. The domain of Kush was not limited to the Sudan, but extended well into the Southeastern Islands of Asia. This logically includes Mesopotamia.

“In modern geography the name Ethiopia is confined to the country known as Abyssinia, an extensive territory in East Africa. In ancient times Ethiopia extended over vast domains in both Africa and Asia."
“It seems certain,” declares Sir E. A. Wallis Budge, “that classical historians and geographers called the whole region from India to Egypt, both countries inclusive, by the name of Ethiopia, and in consequence they regarded all the dark-skinned and black peoples who inhabited it as Ethiopians. Mention is made of Eastern and Western Ethiopians and it is probable that the Easterners were Asiatics and the Westerners Africans.” (History of Ethiopia, Vol. I., Preface, by Sir E. A. Wallis Budge.)
​

The Xi or "Olmec" civilization was the result of migrating Africans whom inhabited the Northeast of the continent. The earliest foundations of the Olmec civilization coincidentally coincide with the beginning of political turmoil in Kemet. That along with a host of other forms of evidence certainly imply that civilization was spread from Africa into the Americas. This notion that civilization is "static" is ridiculous. It clearly has a source, and Africa is it.

​

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

All of that may be true, but the ultimate origin of Sumerian civilization is the result of various Africoid populations migrating from Northeastern Africa.

The same is true of Europe and Asia, but that was several hundred-thousand years ago. All civilizations on the planet ultimately came from Africa through several migrations, but the simple fact of the matter is those civilizations existed BEFORE there was any such place as Nubia or Kemet and all the supposed links to them as points of origin are ad hoc.​

 

[The Wall Is Undefeated!]

All of that may be true, but the ultimate origin of Sumerian civilization is the result of various Africoid populations migrating from Northeastern Africa. There are Niger-Congo speaking populations with oral traditions of living in Sumeria, and several linguist have noted that Sumerian has Bantu elements in it.

There is no linguistic, genetic or archaeological evidence to support Sumer being founded by Africans.
The Sumerian language is an isolated language.

​

Sumer was founded by Nubians, and enough evidence presented here that you have not addressed has validated that claim. The domain of Kush was not limited to the Sudan, but extended well into the Southeastern Islands of Asia. This logically includes Mesopotamia.

“In modern geography the name Ethiopia is confined to the country known as Abyssinia, an extensive territory in East Africa. In ancient times Ethiopia extended over vast domains in both Africa and Asia."
“It seems certain,” declares Sir E. A. Wallis Budge, “that classical historians and geographers called the whole region from India to Egypt, both countries inclusive, by the name of Ethiopia, and in consequence they regarded all the dark-skinned and black peoples who inhabited it as Ethiopians. Mention is made of Eastern and Western Ethiopians and it is probable that the Easterners were Asiatics and the Westerners Africans.” (History of Ethiopia, Vol. I., Preface, by Sir E. A. Wallis Budge.)​

​

Kush and Ethiopia weren't the same places geographically in ancient times. Stop lying.
Ethiopia in ancient/antiquities times simply meant land of the burnt faces. It had nothing to do with the cultures as the lands never had a shared culture. It had nothing to do with genetics as the genetics of those places were very different.

​

The Xi or "Olmec" civilization was the result of migrating Africans whom inhabited the Northeast of the continent. The earliest foundations of the Olmec civilization coincidentally coincide with the beginning of political turmoil in Kemet. That along with a host of other forms of evidence certainly imply that civilization was spread from Africa into the Americas. This notion that civilization is "static" is ridiculous. It clearly has a source, and Africa is it.

The earliest foundations of the Olmec were around 2500 BCE. The massive Olmec stone heads were built within the time range of 1500-400 BCE. The so-called turmoil of Egypt (When the Persians invaded) was 525 BCE.
Once again you are just plain wrong.

 

[Asante]

The same is true of Europe and Asia, but that was several hundred-thousand years ago. All civilizations on the planet ultimately came from Africa through several migrations,​

​

No it was not "several hundred thousand years ago".that those regions were populated by OOA. OOA's earliest date is around a 100k years ago, so you saying that several 100k years ago this occurred is false. The earliest populations that left out of Africa at this OOA period have nothing to do with the Mesolithic populations of Europe nor the later Neolithic populations from Eurasia who were clearly more recent black Africans.

This event happened around 12,000 BCE to 6,000 BCE. That's not "several hundred thousand years ago". Furthermore the Natufians are THE forebearers of agriculture in the World, and they did not only go into Europe. These early farmers in the Levant of clear African origin clearly expanded east from the fertile crescent as well, which is where some of the early foundations of "Sumer" were laid.

but the simple fact of the matter is those civilizations existed BEFORE there was any such place as Nubia or Kemet and all the supposed links to them as points of origin are ad hoc.

Chill out;

"extreme erosion on the body of the Sphinx could not be the result of wind and sand, as has been universally assumed, but rather was the result of water. Geologists agree that in the distant past Kemet was subjected to severe flooding. This period coincides with the melting of the ice from the last Ice Age (13,000-10,000 B.C.E). Wind erosion cannot take place when the body of the Sphinx is covered by sand, and it can be proved that the Sphinx has been in this condition for nearly all of the last five thousand years - since the alleged time of its 4th Dynasty construction. Furthermore, if wind-blown sand had indeed caused the deep erosion of the Sphinx, we would expect to find evidence of such erosion on other Kemetic monuments built of similar materials and exposed to the wind for a similar length of time. ... this means the Sphinx was carved before Kemet was inundated with the waters of the great Ice Age floods, and that those waters caused the unique erosion patterns on the Sphinx."


​

The Sphinx is older than anything in Sumer, and wherever else you ascribing civilization to some phantom non African migrant civilization.

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

No it was not "several hundred thousand years ago".that those regions were populated by OOA. OOA's earliest date is around a 100k years ago, so you saying that several 100k years ago this occurred is false.

There were several migrations OOA. Not just one according to Cheik Anta Diop. So, what I said isn't false at all.

And ANYTHING from Graham Hancock is automatically invalid.....

Graham Hancock’s ‘Lost Civilisation’ - Bad Archaeology

I previously debunked his age of the Pyramids/Sphinx here....

https://www.thecoli.com/posts/8471060/

This paper destroys his entire 'theory'....

A Critique of Graham Hancock's Forced Numerical Relationship between the Great Pyramid of Giza and Earth's Dimensions​

 

[Asante]

There is no linguistic

Incorrect. Asar Imhotep has done a great job at narrating a new concrete foundation for African linguistics, and particularly Bantu. Bantu was clearly spoken in ancient Sumer as shown in his examples below.

"ABOUT THE AUTHOR: GJK Campbell-Dunn (frm Sumerian Grammar 2009)

Graham Campbell-Dunn was awarded his MA in Classics with First Class Honours by the University of New Zealand and went to Cambridge on a Postgraduate Scholarship, where he studied under the comparativists W. S. Allen and R. G. Coleman. His eminent teachers also included John Chadwick who worked on the Linear B decipherment and the linguist John Lyons, a former student of Noam Chomsky.

After lecturing at the NZ universities Graham retired in 1991 to devote his time to research into the African origins of the classical and related languages. His interest in Italian theories of Mediterranean substrate lead him to study the work of the Niger-Congo comparative scholars D. Westermann and H. Mukarovsky. His researches have cast new light on Minoan Linear A, Etruscan, Basque, Indo-European and now Sumerian. Graham is the founder of Template Theory, a radical new hypothesis concerning syllabic structure and lost sound replacement in early African languages.

This book applies the comparative method to prove that Sumerian is not a language isolate. It is related in its vocabulary, grammar and phonology to the Niger-Congo group of languages. The relationship is particularly close for languages of the Mande group, with which it shares OV word order and erosion of the original Niger-Congo noun prefixes. Niger-Congo suffixes can also be identified, such as the postposed article in –la, -a, -al and the old Niger-Congo definite in –ri, -di.


SUMERIAN.....NIGER-CONGO.....MEANING
ni, nitah “man”.....ni.....“man”
eme “tongue”.....(d)eme.....“tongue”
lu “male”.....lu.....“head”, “chief”
ĝin “to go”.....gi.....“go”
ki “earth”.....cí.....“earth”
aba “who ?”.....(a)-ba.....“someone”
bi “speak”.....bil.....“tell”
pa “wing”.....papa.....“wing”
da “side”.....tá.....“thigh”
tir “forest”.....ti.....“tree”
kár “encircle”.....ka.....“ring”
me6 “to make”.....ma.....“to make”
mu “to burn”.....mudi.....“torch, bright”
hul “destroy”.....kú,kúá.....“kill”
a-rà “road’.....njila.....“road”
ĝír “sword”, si “horn”.....kin “needle”, & cín.....“horn”
zú “tooth”.....dum.....“to bite”

The Sumerian silent determinatives (really classifiers), about 55 of which are used with certain nouns, have all now been assigned Niger-Congo etymologies. Thus uru, iri “det. with towns” is Niger-Congo lu, li, (ru, ri) “head” (compare English “capital”), with a Niger-Congo vocalic prefix before the root. Likewise ki “det. with places” is Niger-Congo gi,, ki, kyi, ci “village, settlement”. Even sik, siki “det. for wool etc” is a Niger-Congo word for “hair, fur” applied to wool. The clarification of this large grammatical system clinches the argument, and sheds new light on the early structure of Niger-Congo and Nilo-Saharan languages.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

We should also note the conclusions given by Campbell-Dunn who, just like Dr. Winters, comes to the conclusion that Sumerian is closely related to Mande. Campbell-Dunn doesn't appear to be familiar with Dr. Winters work, nor does he reference any of his works. Therefore, this is an independent analysis with the same conclusion. Which means that one may have to look at Dr. Winter's works a little more carefully before offhandedly dismissing said works."​

Asar Imhotep has demonstrated this through his own comparisons based on what is perhaps the only African language to be reconstructed "Negro-Egyptian" (Theophile Obenga) by Mboli. Keep in mind that not one of the other African language families (even Niger-Congo) have never been reconstructed to a common ancestor. Alot of Africanist (including myself) used assumptions on the validity on these language families that we readily identify. This is African linguistics from scratch.

In Hermstein's book the biological evidence is examined​

genetic

Again that is another false dismissal on your behalf. The presence of "BENIN" (West Africa) sickle cell found in Dravidian Indian sickle cell carriers cannot be explained by anything recent like a slave trade. Those same Dravidian Indians were responsible for the main peopling of ancient Sumer. Dr. Clyde Winters breaks this down below;

"The Dravidian and Sumerian people share cultural and linguistic features with Africans [10-14]. The archaeological evidence suggest that the Dravidian people belonged to the C-Group people of Nubia and migrated to India 5kya [9,10-11]. The Dravidian origination in Nubia, the original home of the Niger-Congo speakers who carry the Benin and Senegal HbS would explain the existence of African HbS haplotypes in India. These haplotypes in India suggest that they already existed among Dravidian and Niger-Congo speaking populations before they separated 5kya.

The HbS chromosome haplotypes of the Indian Tribals were Arab-Indian with 25% of the haplotypes
possessing the epsilon polymorphic site identical to the Senegal6b. The Senegal and Indian sickle cell
share haplotypes [8]. The Arab-Indian and Senegal haplotypes share the C!T mutation at position -158
4,7.

In India the Benin HbS is the most common haplotype in western India. To account for the presence of this haplotype in India researchers argue that African slaves took this gene to India."

There are problems with this theory.The major problem with the slave trade solution for the transmission of the Benin haplotype to India, is that the African slaves in India are mainly of Somali-Ethiopian origin—not West African origin . In addition, the vast majority of dravidian carriers of SC are Dravidian Tribal populations who have had little contact with non-Indian groups for millenia.​

or archaeological evidence to support Sumer being founded by Africans.

In order for you to say that robotic retarded indenial bullshyt, you would have had to completely ignore the evidence that I had presented a few post back about the red and black pottery trail from Nubia into Sumer all the way over into India.

"Archaeological research has confirmed that cultural interaction existed between the contemporary civilizations of the 4th and 3rd millenia B.C. Extensive trade routes connected the Proto-Dravidians of the Indus Valley, with African people in Egypto-Nubia, and the Elamites and Sumerians. P. Kohl discovered that vessels from IVBI worshop at Tepe Yahya, have a uniform shape and design. Vessels sharing this style are distributed from Soviet Uzbekistan to the Indus Valley, and Sumerian, Elamite and Egyptian sites. (2) In addition, we find common arrowheads at Harappan sites, and sites in Iran, Egypt, Minoan Crete and Heladic Greece.
It appears that the locus for this distribution of cultural traditions and technology was the Saharan-Nubian zone or Kush. This would explain why the Sumerians and Elamites often referred to themselves as “ksh”. For example the ancient Sumerians called their dynasty “Kish”. The words “kish”, “kesh” and “kush” were also names for ancient Nubia-Sudan.
The Elamites also came from Kush. According to the classical writer Strabo, Susa the centre of the Elamite civilization was founded by Tithonus, king of Kush.
B.B. Lal has shown conclusively that the Dravidians came from Nubia and were related to the C-Group people who founded the Kerma dynasty.(3) They both used a common black-and-red ware (BRW) which Lal found was analogous to ceramics used by the megalithic people in India who also used analogous pottery signs identical to those found in the corpus of Indus Valley writing. (4)
Singh believes that this pottery spread from Nubia, through Mesopotamia and Iran southward into India.(5) The earliest examples of this BRW date to the Amratian period (4000-3500 B.C.).
This same BRW was found at the lowest levels of Harappan sites at Lothal and Rangpur. After 1700 B.C. This ceramic tradition spread southward into megalithic India.(6) It is also found in Uzbekistan and China.

List of Sources​

The Sumerian language is an isolated language

​

​

You are entirely too dedicated to maintaining the illogical white status quo of history for me to consider anything other than an agent. It should be clear to anybody following this thread that your complete dedication to orthodox white Western history (including the bantu migration from Cameroon) that you are a Cac.

​

Kush and Ethiopia weren't the same places geographically in ancient times. Stop lying.
Ethiopia in ancient/antiquities times simply meant land of the burnt faces. It had nothing to do with the cultures as the lands never had a shared culture. It had nothing to do with genetics as the genetics of those places were very different.

​

What the fukk are you talking about? The reference to Nubia as "aEthiopia" is a Greek thing. The reference to Ethiopia just like Ta-Neteru was used for the same region by the Ikami is EVERYTHING IN AFRICA OUTSIDE OF KEMET. The ancient Ikami called this land of Nubia "Punt" or "Ta Neteru" as the land of the Gods, and their homeland. The same "Ethiopian" homeland that the Greeks went to validate themselves, and were told by the Ethiopians (Nubians dumbass) that the ancient ikami were simply colonist sent Northward from their Nubian land (hence the Nubian origins of Kemet). The quote from Wallis Budge that made you shyt yourself, was in reference to Nubia's expanded dominion that went well past Sudan proper to include all of West, South and Central Africa, as well as the adjacent Arabian peninsula, and Indian Sub Continent to the East. These people all had a common origin with the populations of Nubia.

The earliest foundations of the Olmec were around 2500 BCE.

Again you lousy bytch your denial is unwarranted. You cite nothing more than Wikipedia text for your 2,500 year claim of the Olmec civilization. The actual text that states this from Wikipedia state this;

"The Olmecs flourished during Mesoamerica's formative period, dating roughly from as early as 1500 BCE to about 400 BCE. "Pre-Olmec cultures had flourished since about 2500 BCE, but by 1600–1500 BCE, early Olmec culture had emerged,"

Olmecs - Wikipedia
​

What the fukk does "Pre-Olmec culture" mean to you, and especially when the statement is followed by an emergence in actual Olmec culture a millennium later? Your reading comprehension skills are horrendous. What are you attributing to "PRE-olmec" culture, which means that there was no civilization or formative civilization at that time dumbass.

The massive Olmec stone heads were built within the time range of 1500-400 BCE. The so-called turmoil of Egypt (When the Persians invaded) was 525 BCE. Once again you are just plain wrong.

The HYSKOS who impeded on the order already established by the Africans of Northern Kemet and the adjacent Canaan drove those Africans out of the region with their hostile behavior including enslavement. This hostile takeover of Northern Kemet and Canaan occurred ironically during the same time that the formative periods of not only the Olmec civilization, but the Nok civilization of West Africa

as well took place. The invasion that brought the Africans from Kemet over in the America's to establish civilization was the Hyskos hostile takeover (not really an invasion" of the 18th-17th century.

 

[Asante]

@YouRemindMe You can eat a dikk too.

 

[Asante]

There were several migrations OOA. Not just one according to Cheik Anta Diop. So, what I said isn't false at all.​

​

You didn't say that there were many OOA's. You made the incorrect statement that this OOA event for one happened several hundreds of thousands of years ago. That is patently false. Genetic evidence does not support a population from that time leading to the peopling of the rest of the World. You were wrong completely. You also insinuated that these initial migrations from Africa put in place the same populations that would eventually create civilization in those regions "several 100k's years later". It's full blown retardation on your part, and this blunder of the most basic knowledge of this debate PROVES that you CANNOT know shyt about the Sphinx's true age. Instead you're only going to post ANYTHING that you see disputing the Sphinx's argument, and hoist it up as the end all be all. No fukking logically thinking. Just Sa neter style nikka in the basement uninformed dedication to silly shyt.​

​

And ANYTHING from Graham Hancock is automatically invalid.....

You understand that that is a logical fallacy for one don't you?​

​

I previously debunked his age of the Pyramids/Sphinx here....

https://www.thecoli.com/posts/8471060/

You didn't debunk shyt though. The WATER EROSION on the sides of the Sphinx, which located in the middle of a desert that receives so little rain fall that the occupying authority is ready to wage war against the country that houses the source of it's main river (Ethiopia). So how in the fukk did water ERODE this limestone? Do you understand how much water it would take to erode limestone, especially to that degree? There is no rainfall in that region TODAY (or even 5,000 years ago) that can possibly explain the extent of the monuments damage. The most recent time that this region has been wet has been 6-7 thousand years ago, and common sense says that it was built much earlier than that.
​

This paper destroys his entire 'theory'....

A Critique of Graham Hancock's Forced Numerical Relationship between the Great Pyramid of Giza and Earth's Dimensions

You don't know shyt. You're cheer leading for anything that can support your theological based views of history (hence Garden of Eden in Sumer and what not). Again the entire focus is on his claim of the correlation of the Great Pyramid and the Sphinx. The article DOES NOT TOUCH the issue of WATER EROSION on the side of the Sphinx that is LOCATED IN A BARREN DESERT! How in the Hell did water erosion damage it, but NOT the surrounding structures that were supposedly dated to the same time frame, and are made of similar or the same material? No one can answer that question, without logically concluding that the Sphinx existed during the WET PERIOD of the ancient Sahara. It would retarded to assume that it was constructed DURING that wet period, rather than much earlier.

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

You didn't say that their were many OOA's.​

​

I didn't say a few things, doesn't make what I did say, false.​

You understand that that is a logical fallacy for one don't you?

Pointing to logical fallacies doesn't prove your assertions.
​

You didn't debunk shyt though. The WATER EROSION on the sides of the Sphinx, which located in the middle of a desert that receives so little rain​

This shows you didn't read what was posted as the points you raised were demolished in the post and the whole theory shown to be nonsense.

Using bad, universally panned archaeology won't help you prove your argument.

​

 

[360Waves]

If we’re from Egypt great. If we’re not, also great. The ugly truth is some of y’all seem to be fighting so hard to cling to Egypt because without it you feel that there aren’t many other noteworthy black civilizations to talk about in history. Certainly none with the innovations, inventions and overall allure of Egypt. White people can see that from a mile away and it makes us look sad and pathetic. Instead of fighting tooth and nail to prove Egypt was ours, let’s make the history of other ancient African civilizations mainstream.

 

[Asante]

I didn't say a few things, doesn't make what I did say, false.​

​

nikka you were wrong about your datings of OOA (claiming 100's of thousands of years ago for OOA), and the your subsequent assumptions that the populations that left Africa initially were responsible for the later civilizations to come tens of thousands of years later in certain areas that they may have stepped across. You were wrong take the L.

Pointing to logical fallacies doesn't prove your assertions.

​

You attempted to dismiss the man, with the juvenile assertion that he's wrong about everything. That is so asinine of a claim that it becomes harder for me to take you seriously.
​

This shows you didn't read what was posted as the points you raised were demolished in the post and the whole theory shown to be nonsense.

Using bad, universally panned archaeology won't help you prove your argument.

You're using phrases from the article to make yourself sound well read when you're clearly not. The facts of the issue of water erosion (which were not addressed in any of your articles) that I presented in my last post you completely ignored to make your own cynical retorts. You don't have an answer for that. As I stated the Sphinx is much older than dynastic Kemet, and older than Sumeria. Nubia in the Sudan to the south is even older than that with the oldest officially recognized permanent structure found to date being there;

Affad 23

 

[Asante]

If we’re from Egypt great. If we’re not, also great. The ugly truth is some of y’all seem to be fighting so hard to cling to Egypt because without it you feel that there aren’t many other noteworthy black civilizations to talk about in history.

Go eat a dikk Cac.

The "Caucasoid" Legacy

​

There has been a steady encroachment and pushing south of the melaninated peoples who once inhabited every continent and landmass, by the albinoid mutants since they were released from the caves. They act like a cancer that spreads and destroys. Hiding the truth of this matter has been a focal point of Western institutions. The evidence provided on the last post in the Natufian-Neolithic section and others goes into detail of the original African migrants who settled and civilized Europe, but the Tamahu hide this fact through obscuring the outright narrative. There own scholars in some cases outright called them the savage cancers that they were to the blacks who were aboriginal to Asia AND Europe before they finally came to those regions. Through hiding the fact of this consistent encroachment of the pale populations (which includes East Asians) onto the lands and former lands of the melaninated peoples all around the World, they create narratives that attempt to frame those melaninated peoples whom point this out as "history thieves". Only a Devil would lie in such ways.

The ancient civilizations were in place throughout the World in highly advanced states prior to the release of the Tamahu from the Caucus mountains after 2,000 BC. The Indo-European were introduced to all forms of agriculture and civilization through their interactions with our ancestors. The funniest part about white's who try to dismiss this by trying to relegate these facts and narrative to "new aged Afrocentrism" is the fact that even amidst the most blistering ignorance of the 19th and 20th centuries there were in fact some Caucasian "scholars" who had no issue with telling the truth about their extremely humble origin.

The North American Review Volume 0139 Issue 334 (Sept 1884)​

​

Title: Our Remote Ancestry [pp. 246-256]​

​

Author: Winchell, Alexander, Prof.​

​

Collection: Journals: North American Review (1815 - 1900)​

("Penetrating the Earth like miserable ants" until 2,000 B.C.E.)​

​

The Tamahu have never created a civilization in their 6,000 year existence. Africoid populations form the basis of all civilizations around the World. The Tamahu have gained a superiority complex which is the adverse affect of having an inferiority complex. Their inferiority complex originated from the fact that they knew right off the bat that they were locked into the Caucus for thousands of years in a miserable state of existence all by themselves. Every ounce of innovation that they appear to have comes from a black base of knowledge, and the very fact that they did not even have a language of their own while in those caves is all the proof needed of their mental inferiority. The necessity of basic communication in accomplishing anything as a collective need not be explained. The fact that they were even placed into such a confined area, rather than being slaughtered or enslaved by those who put them in a confined area is proof of their humbling defeat as a people and the moral superiority of those who put them there.

Certainly none with the innovations, inventions and overall allure of Egypt. White people can see that from a mile away and it makes us look sad and pathetic.

No see THIS is pathetic;

These same white people who lived like this until 2,000 BC?

​

People who burn up in the Sun and grow tails do not dictate what is pathetic to me.

Instead of fighting tooth and nail to prove Egypt was ours, let’s make the history of other ancient African civilizations mainstream.

White people never had a civilization. In fact black people invented every civilization on Earth, and white usurped them in Asia, Europe and North Africa. Kemet was the center piece of African civilization, and that's why it is our duty to remind the the World of that fact.

 

[Dr. Hibbert's Revenge]

Who the fukk cares whether we come from Egypt (I still have yet to see any definitive GENETIC proof that all black people originated in "Kemet," only that most Egyptians were "black" by modern standards of race)? Africa remains in squalor while every other continent grows wealthy from our resources.

Do you think Africans in Africa spend long nights huddled around a fireplace, debating whether or not their ancestors came from Egypt?

 

[Asante]

Who the fukk cares whether we come from Egypt (I still have yet to see any definitive GENETIC proof that all black people originated in "Kemet," only that most Egyptians were "black" by modern standards of race)?

Well dumbass the second and third post of this thread are dedicated to the genetic evidence linking Bantu speaking populations to ancient Kemet

https://www.thecoli.com/posts/38178984/
​

You're asking why is accurate history important, and that is a question that only a dumb ass would ask. No one from any other race asked why knowing their history is important. Only the dumbasses from our race (or perceived to be from our race...agents) ask that shyt.

Africa remains in squalor while every other continent grows wealthy from our resources.

Africa remains in squalor because of the disunity that facilitated ever since our collective departure from our unified fronts in Northeastern Africa (Nubia-Kemet). That's why knowing your history is importance dumbass.

Do you think Africans in Africa spend long nights huddled around a fireplace, debating whether or not their ancestors came from Egypt?

No dumbass they don't debate what is universally known about their history.

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

nikka you were wrong about your datings of OOA (claiming 100's of thousands of years ago for OOA).

Wrong.....again. Homo ergaster left Africa 1.75 million years ago. They branched into Asian homo erectus 1.6 million years ago.

​

You attempted to dismiss the man, with the juvenile assertion that he's wrong about everything. That is so asinine of a claim that it becomes harder for me to take you seriously.​

He is wrong about everything. If his claims were valid, they'd be standard education for up-and-coming archaeologists. Instead, he's pretty much regarded as a 'kook'.​

​

You're using phrases from the article to make yourself sound well read when you're clearly not.

Says the guy that copied-and-pasted his entire argument from someone else and didn't even credit him.

​

The facts of the issue of water erosion (which were not addressed in any of your articles) that I presented in my last post you completely ignored to make your own cynical retorts. You don't have an answer for that. As I stated the Sphinx is much older than dynastic Kemet, and older than Sumer.

Water isn't the only force of erosion, thus, why it was ignored, and your assertion was answered, you just didn't read it.​