Black Egyptians

[Ibrahim]

^^ Ok that's fine. Please take your time and read through all my sources (including the links where they provided) and watch all of the videos that I have posted. Post your own counter evidence if you feel the need to. After you do this then please give your opinion on what you feel is the most likely appearance of the ancient Egyptians.

ooh, goody! I can haz free practice on critiquing hypotheses!

before I begin, let me point out that what I'm about to say doesn't really address what the Egyptians looked like (and I really don't care: think what you want, I personally find it unimportant). however, I do have a few things to say on the methodology--from my perspective as a paleontology and geology student. (so kind of a layman--not totally so)

this is not a complete refutation either: i'm not about to sit down and watch a few hours worth of bad quality YT clips (the video distortions give me headaches--nothing personal).

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

1-being peer reviewed on its own means nothing. let me explain: there is a paper from Ruben and Quick, 2009, that is peer reviewed: well illustrated, detailed, multiple reviewers, good journal. the author Ruben--John Ruben, has even been published in Science and nature, all on Avian evolution. yet, most Paleontologists in the field of Avian evolution, and students like me, think he's a complete jag-off, and full of it. I could waste a post on why, but the point is, it's not just whether it's peer reviewed, but the actual arguments in it, and in your/everyone's case, how you interpret it(underlined part is to me the issue here).


2-where does that lead us with the papers you did cite? well, I don't know--not completely. but those parts I do know, I have to put a question mark on: one example is that paper you cite about Egyptians having genes matching sub-saharan Africans (the DNA tribes digest article). now, I will not dispute that finding--in fact I'm not really surprised. but I must ask: does the genetic test isolate the nature of the skin color genes (if any)? and was this uniform? that is, is it confined only to Pharaoh's family, or is spread among the larger population of Egypt? This is especially, as having read it, that the authors make this caveat:

These regional matches do not necessarily indicate an exclusively African ancestry for the Amarna pharaonic family. However, results indicate these ancient individuals inherited some alleles that today are more frequent in populations of Africa than in other parts of the world (such as D18S51=19 and
D21S11=34).

this, combined with the very table you posted here, points to the test being a generic DNA test, where affinities were arrived at using a statistical method, for a small group of people in a single family. these clearly match African populations best, but at the same time, they don't really say much more: That small European part may actually be the part responsible for looks for all I know. to further ruin your day with that particular paper, I looked into the methods of the paper (and journal), where I found this:

Q: Do DNA Tribes results correspond to physical appearance?

A: Our analysis uses neutral genetic markers not associated with physical appearance. Neutral genetic markers
are locations within a person’s DNA not associated with phenotype (appearance) and not subject to natural
selection. Genes (alleles) that determine hair or eye color are not neutral, but neutral markers can silently convey
genetic information not visible on the surface. For instance, a person might have light hair and eye pigmentation
while still retaining some neutral genetic links to the Sub-Saharan world region passed down from an African
grandparent.

in short, the source you cite is completely and utterly irrelevant to your whole point,

then there is this: http://etd2.uofk.edu/view_etd.php?etd_details=4312 (which you cited Btw). This one I know for a fact has even less to do with "race", as it tests mtDNA, and Y-chromosome DNA: the former is the DNA of the mitochondria, which is related to metabolism of a cell, not appearance of a full person, and Y-chromosome largely causes one to grow testicles and a penis when an embryo (i.e. It's the chromosome that makes males males). And again, it doesn't really say much about what Ancient Egyptians looked like.

finally, the pictures you post really don't mean anything--not on their own. I could show you a whole bunch (more than what you have, actually) of pictures of Arabs like me who have fair skin and blond hair, and tell you "Arabs are European! see!", and it would have the same meaning: none at all. what you need to do instead, is put these into context: do a survey of randomly selected pictures the Egyptians made of themselves, and see what the norm is. preferably, ones that are painted, and not just unpainted stone/carvings, since you never know for sure otherwise.

in short: you could probably be absolutely right for all I know: Egyptians were generally "black". but your methodology here is, at least by my standards and training, complete garbage. and frankly, I'm not really sure why you care about this, or anyone here.