Genetic Genealogy - Scientific Proof that Egyptians are descendants of Annunaki Alien Race?

originally posted by: FinallyAwake
Great thread thanks 👍

My best friend is a Christian minister (I'm agnostic) and i literally asked him just today (we're both in Africa as I write) "Soooooo if we all descend from Africa, how comes Adam and Eve are white?"
He said "They weren't, that's just what Christians said"
I was like "wtf?? Who are you???" 😐

Biblical Adam and Eve is whatever you imagine them to be.
Genetic Adam and Eve were most likely black.
BTW an interesting aspect to this whole garden of Eden thing, it seemed to stretch from Mesopotamia to the white and Blue Nile as per Biblical lore.

Now a river flowed out of Eden to water the garden; and from there it divided and became four rivers. The name of the first is Pishon; it flows around the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold. 12 The gold of that land is good; the bdellium and the onyx stone are there. The name of the second river is Gihon; it flows around the whole land of Cush. The name of the third river is Tigris; it flows east of Assyria. And the fourth river is the Euphrates.
www.biblegateway.com...

originally posted by: Spider879Genetic Adam and Eve were most likely black.

I would say Adam and Eve were part black yes, but also part pink and part brown, maybe even a bit yellow too. The location is roughly the meeting point of all the ancient peoples / continents.

originally posted by: ufoorbhunter

originally posted by: Spider879Genetic Adam and Eve were most likely black.

I would say Adam and Eve were part black yes, but also part pink and part brown, maybe even a bit yellow too. The location is roughly the meeting point of all the ancient peoples / continents.

"Genetic " Adam and Eve evolved in the tropical grasslands of east or even southeastern Africa, environmental conditions would have them evolved very dark skins, but within them was the ability to adapt to different climatic conditions, there is no need for chest thumping or bemoaning this totally accident of geography, so called pinkish or White skin is very very recent, perhaps as late as 8 to 7 kyrs old, modern "us" has been around for what?? 200,000 yrs.

a reply to: Spider879

Thanks for that Spider, you always enlighten me. I agree totally about the recent skin thing with brown and pink skins............. These people actually are physically very similar apart from our perceived colours.

But what about east Asians? Was this a recent change? They have very different physical look to blacks, whites and browns. Would their split into yellow skins have been much earlier? Chinese etc have different bodies to the others?

a reply to: ufoorbhunter

Apparently it depends on where they went, some theorised yellowish complexion developed in cooler conditions but not extremely cold, if you look at a map you would find a north south gradition , today some of the darkest ppl lived out in the Pacific looked like Africans by eyeballing but are more related to their yellowish brethren than modern Africans.


Modern Africans with slue eyes developed in Africa..local conditions.


Asian Pacific folks.
Color and phenotype can Change with as lil as 9 months.. trust me I know..

a reply to: Spider879

That photo of the modern African is fairly similar to the Asian. Lots of bushmen / Kalahari Namibians in the desert resemble that pic. Maybe the Kalahari moved out to east asia.

I can remember a few years ago they showed some footage on the news about African albinos being hunted by witch doctors for some pagan reason. Anyway, there was this whole football team of albino players, they looked every bit northern European. Reminded me of some Irish people I'd met specifically if one could pinpoint things.

On topic, much of the Bible stuff will be proven to have taken place in Africa itself. I do believe a strong element of modern Jews came from Egypt / north Africa. Indeed maybe even Ethiopia originally, with the Falasha still living there to this day. They even found a tribe in north African Egyptian times called the Habiru.

it's all fun stuff and the three continenets are not that divided up into simplistic name asia, Africa, europe calling of today when you go back in time, folk were moving around possibly more than todays crazy world where borders have been erected. My own region in the west of England is definitely Annunaki in origin, Iraqi based going back thousands of years. You see the same faces on the streets as that part of asia, just in different costumes.

originally posted by: ufoorbhunter
a reply to: Spider879

Thanks for that Spider, you always enlighten me. I agree totally about the recent skin thing with brown and pink skins............. These people actually are physically very similar apart from our perceived colours.

But what about east Asians? Was this a recent change? They have very different physical look to blacks, whites and browns. Would their split into yellow skins have been much earlier? Chinese etc have different bodies to the others?

There are small changes in the skeletal structure (not skin color, because that's a wide range of tones) between classic Asian, African, and Caucasian groups.

Humans migrated into Asia fairly early on... but the earliest arrivals were NOT homo sapiens but their ancestor, homo erectus. H. sapiens hits Eurasia and Asia about the same time it enters Europe (around 40,000 years ago.)

(source)

originally posted by: ufoorbhunter
a reply to: Spider879
I do believe a strong element of modern Jews came from Egypt / north Africa.

In the sense that all people migrated through that area of Africa if they were going out of Africa, the Jews "sort of" came from Africa. However, as a cultural group, Jews are a recent bunch - they are a group of Middle Eastern people who form an ethnic identity sometime around 2,000 BC.

Egyptian civilization begins around 3,000 BC. The Jews do not show up as a population in Egypt until about the time of Ramesses The Great (around 1300 BC) but then it's only in fairly small numbers. A larger number of them show up in Egypt around the time of Cleopatra (30 BC), when Egypt under the Ptolemies has become relatively Helenized and they come in with the Greeks into the big Helenic cities.

They even found a tribe in north African Egyptian times called the Habiru

I think you've misremembered. Apiru/Habiru is a term used by a lot of Middle Eastern rulers and means something like "wandering bandit." The "wandering bandits" are groups of ex-slaves, rebels, mercenaries, and other nomadic groups and are from many different tribes and nations.

(additional information)

Hello! How far back do the ancestry dna tests go? Mine said I was 0 % African. So what planet am I from? I thought we were all African at the beginning.

originally posted by: frugal
Hello! How far back do the ancestry dna tests go? Mine said I was 0 % African. So what planet am I from? I thought we were all African at the beginning.

Depends on which service you use. National Geographic's "Genographics" is the one that traces various lineages for you.

What they're doing is tracing common genes. So if you look at your modern ancestry analysis, it should show no African ancestors - if your people came out of Africa more than 400 years ago. NatGeo has a set of rules that looks at human migration patterns based on genes. That's where you see where your ancient ancestors migrated from.

originally posted by: frugal
Hello! How far back do the ancestry dna tests go? Mine said I was 0 % African. So what planet am I from? I thought we were all African at the beginning.

You evolved from African blood dripping down through the rocks (white = inner earth origin).

originally posted by: frugal
Hello! How far back do the ancestry dna tests go? Mine said I was 0 % African. So what planet am I from? I thought we were all African at the beginning.

Most of them look at intermediary ancestry. Even though mine reads was an African lineage (because an E haplogroup), it shows that I have European origins.

Great story OP. But it's all nonsense. Everyone is related. Makes me laugh, how people "believe/have faith in a "annunaki", but call the Bible "fairytales". There's nobody on earth that ain't "related" to some great historical figure. That's fact! Ounce "science" starts telling the truth, instead of looking for excuses to not believe truth. They'll be more like "scientists" and not catch people like you unaware.

Fa reply to: murphy22
The annunaki was talked about in Sumerian culture, and you're the only person discussing the bible. I see the easiest way for you to disagree, is to insult. Why would you want to make this about your religious beliefs? Oh wait, that's easiest for you to argue. That's petty and childish.

originally posted by: Spider879
a reply to: ThreeDeuce

Very interestingly, the Bantu say that they came from the Annu people. There is a scientific connection between Egypt and the Bantus, and we all suspect that Egyptians have an Annunaki connection. Is it possible that the Bantu's ancestors were the Annunaki? I find it highly plausible, especially considering all of the other connections.

Every thing was kinda good until this left turn above, Bantu is a language group with in a larger group call Niger Congo, as far I as know?? Bantu ppl as a whole never said they descended from any Annu which would somehow connect them to Mesopotamian Annunnaki a Sumerian concept with a different language group.

However Anu or Intiu, seemed to have been an ethnic name on the Nile found among the different groups of Nahasu , Intiu meaning pillar, Seti may relate to Bow an early pharoanic state called Ta-Seti.

Hey Spider, I do agree that the jump from Bantu to Annunaki is a big one. To me, there is theory crafting. The Bantu have a direct relationship that I drew to the Egyptians, and the Egyptians are often talked about being connected with ancient Sumeria aka Annunaki. Then, the Bantu themselves say that they come from the Annu. Sure, one could suggest that the Annu is just another African tribe, but one could also draw connection to the Annunaki. I also wouldn't propose a non-connection because of language. It was Babylonian confusion that separated the languages, and this could be an example of such. Of course, I will always admit that I have made theoretical jumps here, but I don't think that they are too absurd. Regardless, I would concur that my theories are not heavily substantiated.

a reply to: ThreeDeuce

Do you even know what the Bantu expansion is, or when it happened, and how it relates to modern african populations.

originally posted by: ThreeDeuce

Hey Spider, I do agree that the jump from Bantu to Annunaki is a big one. To me, there is theory crafting. The Bantu have a direct relationship that I drew to the Egyptians,

They don't...beyond the fact that h. sapiens evolved in the savannahs of Africa and migrated from there. The Bantu language and culture is nothing like the Egyptian and the genetics are not identical.

and the Egyptians are often talked about being connected with ancient Sumeria aka Annunaki.

They had diplomatic relations with them and occasionally ran up there and conquered nearby areas. Except as enemies or client kings, there's no direct relationship. And the Egyptians never thought of them as anything but "wretched foreigners" (that's actually the ancient Egyptian's term for them, and they are shown in many pieces of art as captives that some pharaoh (like Ramesses II) is whacking over the head or who are bowing to the pharaoh and so forth.

originally posted by: punkinworks10
a reply to: ThreeDeuce

Do you even know what the Bantu expansion is, or when it happened, and how it relates to modern african populations.

Apparently not. Wikipedia link shows that the Bantu (which is a fairly late migration - around 1000 BC which is 2000 years after Egyptian civilization started) never got anywhere near Egypt.

originally posted by: Byrd

originally posted by: ThreeDeuce

Hey Spider, I do agree that the jump from Bantu to Annunaki is a big one. To me, there is theory crafting. The Bantu have a direct relationship that I drew to the Egyptians,

They don't...beyond the fact that h. sapiens evolved in the savannahs of Africa and migrated from there. The Bantu language and culture is nothing like the Egyptian and the genetics are not identical.

and the Egyptians are often talked about being connected with ancient Sumeria aka Annunaki.

They had diplomatic relations with them and occasionally ran up there and conquered nearby areas. Except as enemies or client kings, there's no direct relationship. And the Egyptians never thought of them as anything but "wretched foreigners" (that's actually the ancient Egyptian's term for them, and they are shown in many pieces of art as captives that some pharaoh (like Ramesses II) is whacking over the head or who are bowing to the pharaoh and so forth.

Regardless what you think your history proves, my generic genealogy proves a direct relationship between Bantu and Egyptian. The male line of the pharaoh is the same as 90 percent of all Bantu men. Keep saying there's no relationship, and looking foolish.

It's funny the claims that people think they can say that we know for sure. In reality, we don't know what color of person came first. There's tribes in Africa that say they came from white people initially. We don't have evidence either way, but simply opinion that people claim is fact. People are so stubborn that they still argue in the face of actual science. I would wager that the people that say there's no connection between Bantu and Egyptian have zero understanding of haplogroups or genetic genealogy.