Talk:Sahara
|
|
i need to learn about the sahara in 4,000 B.C and what the people did yo survive?
| It is requested that this article, or a section of this article, be expanded See the request on the listing or elsewhere on this talk page. Once the improvements have been completed, you may remove this notice and the page's listing. |
| Contents |
Arabic pronunciation of the word "sahara"
What we have a recording of is an arabic speaker saying the word for "desert" an arabic, which is usually transliterated "sahara". Is this what the Sahara desert is called in arabic? Or is this supposed to be the "correct" pronunciation of the English word "Sahara" (never mind that I don't think English contains either the h sound or the r sound that are used in that file)?
Don't get me wrong, I think it's cool having an arabic ogg file, but my friend the arabic speaker was immediately surprised that this was being listed on this page. --Andrew 05:24, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC)
History of Sahara and the origin of the word Sahara
The history of Sahara at those early times can be found here.
The word Sahara is of Arabic origin which means Desert in English. You can have a look at the List of English words of Arabic origin.
Svest 05:38, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC)
Pronunciation
Look, the pronunciation file is not a recording of the name of the desert. It's a recording of the Arabic word for desert, from which the English name for the desert is derived. It would be misleading to give the impression that that's the correct way to say the name of the desert in English - the English vowels are all different, and the h in particular has a completely different sound. Perhaps unfortunately, the Arabic would normally be transliterated to look just like "Sahara". --Andrew 05:16, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC)
Asinine revisions
===>Let's be reasonable: 70.49.170.143, please don't put claims that directly contradict evidence in an article - that is confusing and useless to readers. Please also do not delete relevant sections without commenting on the Sahara Talk page. Please also do not insert childish diatribes with poor punctuation in the middle of an article. The web page referenced doesn't have a bibliography because it's just an abstract. Did you even look at this page? It's not racist to mention this study - please be reasonable. If you have a political axe to grind, feel free to consult some message board, this is a place for learning and fact. Justin (koavf) 16:32, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)
- look i sent you an e-mail about this the fact is that the study is a bunch of bs.. race does genetically exist and it is impossible to know what a person's race through looking at his gene code.
- secound that link claims to have examined one of the southern most parts of morocco in the sahara.Even if you were to agree with the so called study then you should know it is not talking about north africans but about saharans. who live between the two areas,the caucasian north african and black africa.Also morroco has different populations too like arabs,berbers,europeans and black sub-saharans so you can't pick 20 or whatever random morrocans.
- Another thing morocco is a coutry that has a lot of different people like european looking people in the atlas part of and saharan people in the souss area that the article claims to study.
- I don't have any political axe to grind i just don't want people to read this false info or should i say abstract info.Anything in an encyclopedia should have bibiography and not some abstract bs that anyone can write.
- lastly race only exists on the physical level according to any bio or socalogy professors
- i know this because i am a socalogy and bio student in university
- Europe, North Africa, western Asia and the Indian subcontinent, whose people have wavy or somewhat curly hair, sharp facial features (especially a narrow, prominent nose), and abundant facial and bodily hair
- Please stop giving people mis information by using some site that does not give proof for what it says.
- this is one of the reasons why many professors in my university don't accept internet sources as true sources when one is writeing an essay.
- Every human being shares more than 99.9 per cent of their DNA with everybody else, and the tiny variations that remain differ more within ethnic groups than between them, a major review of the evidence says.
- It is impossible to look at people’s genetic code and deduce whether they are black, Caucasian or Asian, and there is no human population that fits the biological definition of a race, the study found http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8122-1331319_1,00.html
- please stop giving false facts ok
- thanks Posted by 70.49.170.143
- The idea that population genetics is impossible is completely inconsistent with the facts. However, that the Souss Valley is scarcely representative of Morocco is a whole is certainly true - and no genetics study should ever be cited as if it were the last word on the subject, because (as I've seen at Berber) they frequently disagree with each other. The field is still young. - Mustafaa 04:18, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- i think the human genome project and top universitys would have have facts straght and most university today teach what that article states. about it being impossible to tell a person's race through genes. so i think those are the facts. and i belive even some polical figures in the states have quoted this.
- and even if it isn't just one study should be posted as fact here...
- that is why i wanted that part removed... Posted by 70.49.170.143 at 06:37, Apr 17, 2005
- Yesterday, in a special issue of the journal Nature Genetics, the published results of a survey of human variation as expressed in the human genome map conclude that race and ethnicity are no longer satisfactory categories for discerning differences among the human race. "It is impossible to look at people’s genetic code and deduce whether they are black, Caucasian or Asian, and there is no human population that fits the biological definition of a race, the study found."[1] Race and ethnicity are nothing more than culturally based forms of taxonomy. The study also concluded:
- "The human genome map has shown that if two people of any ethnic origin are selected at random, only between 1 in 1,000 and 1 in 1,500 of their genes will differ. This makes our species among the most homogeneous known to science: populations of chimpanzees and fruit flies differ much more from one another in genetic terms. A typical Caucasian’s genes will be as similar—and as different—to those of another Caucasian as they will be to a black African or a Chinese person."
- http://www.newquaker.com/2004_10_24_blogarchive.htm
- science,regelion all these people are accepting the fact... Posted by 70.49.170.143 at 06:43, Apr 17, 2005
Identity of participants and style of editing
Hi 70.49.170.143! Your comments are very welcomed. However, they should be explained here and not in the main article. I see that you've stopped "commenting" there and that you are participating here instead. You may be right but everything needs to be discussed and agreed about before any major edits in the main article.
Another comment I have regarding your edits here is about the way they are structured. It is very hard to realize where your comment starts and where it does end plus that there is no identity information (no identity mark, no dates included) unless one goes checking on the history page; which is time consuming. I am sorry I got to fix that without your consent but it was for the sake of clarity. It would be very nice if you just add a note in order to help readers and participants find out about that fact. I would also suggest,-if you don't mind, that you get a Wikipedia account as probably you will be contributing from time to time. Svest 12:46, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC)
Shipbuilding in the Sahara
There are facts about shipbuilding in the area in the Babalus period. I reverted the article to the last version indicating these facts. Please check out these references : Race and history (http://www.raceandhistory.com/historicalviews/ancientamerica.htm), Physicsdaily.com (http://www.physicsdaily.com/physics/Sahara). Cheers Svest 00:56, May 21, 2005 (UTC) Wiki me up™
- Please refer to Verifiability, Wikipedia:Reliable sources and Wikipedia:Check your facts for reasons why not any old website can be used as a serious source. Additionally, the content we are talking about has been added by Roylee (talk • contribs) in an attempt to lend credibility to all sorts of outlandish claims added to other articles. He has responded evasively to several inquiries of other editors questioning his sources and editing patterns on his talk page. Also, if you check out the links referred to above, you will see that there actually are no facts whatsoever about shipbuilding in this area. All we have are weak 'indications' and 'hints' that require a great stretch of the imagination (or indeed a pervasive Afro-centric bias) to serve as 'evidence' for shipbuilding in the Sahara. The theory is not notable. Anyone who wants to promote theories like this should keep them at his own website. Wikipedia is not the place for this. — mark ✎ 09:13, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
Antarctica?
The opening sentence states that Antarctica is the largest desert in the world. I have not heard that one before and was under the impression that glaciers don't count as deserts. I know there are cold ice-free deserts in Antarctica but rather small compared to the glacier itself. Any thoughts on this? --Bjarki 23:37, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)