"One thing that annoys me is that they label black Egyptians as simply being Nubians.
Upper Egyptians for the most part have always been black, and really still are. "

The same here. But then, everything, no matter how irrational, to separate Egypt from Africa.
You'd have to wonder why, if Egypt had no influence on Greece, if Egyptian civilization
was insignificant, they put so much effort into proving why Egypt is not an African
civilization. Mary Lefkowitz, a Classics professor (this isn't even her field) published
_2_ books railing against "afrocentrism".

I think the reason is that it fundamentally undermines their colonial era reading of history
as a European affair, and if not European, then Indo-European/white. Their rude awakening
doesn't take into account that High Civilization started off as a African Nile Valley,
Mesopotamian and Indian affair. It's the people of the "Third World" who got it all started.
I think that it's this reality that is very bitter among the neo-conservative, reactionary crowd
of Lefkowitz, George Will, etc., who see themselves as the guardians of a particular reading
of Western history. A history where civilization began in 776 BC in Greece with the first
Olympics.

To come back to your original point, there is no physical barrier, no mountain range,
between "Nubia" and "Egypt". Egyptians put their ancestry to the South, not East, and their
language backs that up. Afroasiatic is distinct from Semitic, which means it is very old,
and belongs to the wider group of languages known as Afro-Asiatic. Except for Semitic,
all of these languages are spoken exclusively in Africa, and they cluster around the Sudan
and Ethiopia, which is their most likely point of origin.

In other words, Ancient Egyptians came from the South, from the Nile Valley and East Africa.

Cheers,

Alex