posted
Unless there have been multiple independent studies regarding Tutsi haplogroups I do not trust those results, probably all Hutu samples. Autosomal samples from this region show that there is indeed a strong Hamitic Caucasoid component.
Posts: 695 | From: وكان المصريون القدماء القوقازين | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Idiot. The authors used Tutsi AND Hutu samples so obviously the Tutsi sample can NOT be synonymous with the Hutu as there is a clear and obvious distinction between the two. Furthermore, it was the Hutu sample that showed the Eurasian ancestry (1.4%) so you aren't helping your case that much--i.e., you are claiming the Tutsi were only fully African because you presume that they are actually Hutu. However, it is the Hutu that show the Eurasian ancestry, thereby undermining your case, because if what you said was even remotely possible, then the Tutsi sample would be showing Eurasian ancestry if they were actually Hutu!
posted
In the Structure Analysis by Xing et al. the Hema peoples had relatively high levels of the Caucasoid genetic component (~15%).
While the indigenous inhabitants, the Ituri forest pygmies, had 0%. The Alur lacked the Caucasoid component, and so did the parental populations of the Bantus (West Africans).
Only explanation is Hamitic Caucasoid introgression in this region, probably peaking in the Tutsi.
Posts: 695 | From: وكان المصريون القدماء القوقازين | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ehh! Wrong. The Hema are closely related to the Alur. Cite the exact words in the paper that says the Hema have 15% Eurasian admixture. As stated in the article, several closely related populations were grouped, the Hema and Alur were grouped together. Furthermore, even if there was 15% Eurasian ancestry, you are being bias. How can 15% make them "Hamitic" if they were 85% African?
Then, get it through your Neanderthal like brain that the Hema are Not Tusi and thus have no bearing on the genetic relationships of the TutsiPosts: 1502 | From: Dies Irae | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lmao, you have gone delusional. We have proven you wrong in genetics so you resort to picture spamming that has absolutely no bearing on the genetic evidence
-------------------- L Writes: Posts: 1502 | From: Dies Irae | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Pair'o'huy: Haplogroups are for amateurs, a small number of individuals do not represent the totality of an ethnic group.
WTF?!!
First off, haplogroups are the ONLY way to accurately access ancestry since they are the only genetic sequences that are non-recombinant and thus representative of any direct lineage.
Second, you obviously have no clue about statistical sampling as representative of the general population.
And third, were YOU not the one who has been using haplogroups to support your own arguments in the past couple of pages??!! LMAO
What's the matter? Now that the very haplogroup data proves you wrong you now dispute the science of it?!
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': Lmao, you have gone delusional. We have proven you wrong in genetics so you resort to picture spamming that has absolutely no bearing on the genetic evidence
In other words the troll has degenerated further from what semblance of higher thinking he once had.
Here are a couple of old studies based on assessment of skeletal remains.
Jean Hiernaux, Peoples of the World Series: The People of Africa (1975)
The oldest remains of Homo sapiens sapiens found in East Africa were associated with an industry having similarities with the Capsian. It has been called Upper Kenyan Capsian, although its derivation from the North African Capsian is far from certain. At Gamble's Cave in Kenya, five human skeletons were associated with a late phase of the industry, Upper Kenya Capsian C, which contains pottery. A similar associationis presumed for a skeleton found at Olduvai, which resembles those from Gamble's Cave. The date of Upper Kenya Capsian C is not precisely known (an earlier phase from Prospect Farm on Eburru Mountain close to Gamble's Cave has been dated to about 8000 BC); but the presence of pottery indicates a rather later date, perhaps around 400 BC. The skeletons are of very tall people. They had long, narrow heads, and relatively long, narrow faces. The nose was of medium width; and prognathism, when present, was restricted to the alveolar, or tooth-bearing, region......all their features can be found in several living populations of East Africa, like the Tutsi of Rwanda and Burundi, who are very dark skinned and differ greatly from Europeans in a number of body proportions............. From the foregoing, it is tempting to locate the area of differentiation of these people in the interior of East Africa. There is every reason to believe that they are ancestral to the living 'Elongated East Africans'. Neither of these populations, fossil and modern, should be considered to be closely related to the populations of Europe and western Asia.
Claims that Caucasoid peoples once lived in eastern Africa have been shown to be wrong,... - JO Vogel, Precolonial Africa
Although these sources are old, they are far from outdated since recent studies continue to prove them right including genetics.
It has been shown in hg analysis that Tutsi and others he calls "Hamitic" have no Eurasian ancestry. Now the fool brings up autosomal studies, yet he fails to name what exact autosomal genes in these studies he identifies as "Eurasian".
While we await his answer let's take a look at West Africans like the Fulani below.
No doubt the idiot would call these West Africans "Hamitic Caucasoids" as well. LOLPosts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Perahu: You are definitely more Negroid than the average Eastern Bantu. Your European ancestry is pulling you towards the Eastern Bantus. Without your European ancestry you would not cluster with them.
Oops, didn't know what a phuckup you've made yourself out to be in the previous thread. Never mind, don't respond to my previous post.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Hamitic Caucasoid theory is supported by genetics. Afrocentrists, eat your hearts out!
Posts: 695 | From: وكان المصريون القدماء القوقازين | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged |
Proven. Perahu is retarded. Dienkes did *NOT* write a peer-reviewed paper, he is only a blogger who can offer opinions. He's brainwashed you man...
quote:The Hamitic Caucasoid theory is supported by genetics. Afrocentrists, eat your hearts out!
Hamitic isn't even used by geneticists anymore nor is Caucasian for that matter.
quote:The Maasai are indeed partially Hamitic Caucasoid. They have keen facial features compared to those of neighboring Bantu tribes.
Fulanis, Tutsis are all Hamitic mutts
Based on nothing but what he perceives from exterior anatomical traits, not the genetic specifics provided herein
Posts: 1502 | From: Dies Irae | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Not to mention that the fool obviously doesn't know what "et al." means, otherwise he wouldn't be using it in reference to someone who works alone.
Anyways, what idiot cites a non-geneticist blogger who uses a pseudonym as a credible source?
Posts: 4021 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
To answer simple-minded's question: hg M exist as far south as Tanzania, alongside M1!
Only in considerably lower frequencies, less diversity, and mainly among Northeast African (Cushitic) admixed groups.
List the frequencies [not that it matters here], the names of the tested Tanzanian groups and the authors of the results that you are relying on, that makes you think that you are qualified to expound on my post. Since you are acting like you are elaborating on my post, you had better make sure your source is the very same one as mine.
Your take on diversity is preposterously wild; with the M1 branch and other M branches being in Tanzania vs. essentially just the M1 branch in Ethiopia, in what logical world does that translate into hg M being "less diverse" in Tanzania vs. Ethiopia?
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Sundjata: ^Not to mention that the fool obviously doesn't know what "et al." means, otherwise he wouldn't be using it in reference to someone who works alone.
Yep, lol. At first Perahu at least seemed a little knowledgeable, but when he lost, he really lost it. He's almost as obtuse as the lioness
quote:Anyways, what idiot cites a non-geneticist blogger who uses a pseudonym as a credible source?
Perahu has been brainwashed by Dienkes to an extreme. He literally takes Dienkes words as the Gospel truth. No doubt where his most erroneous ideas come from.
Posts: 1502 | From: Dies Irae | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Perahu is not Jaime at all, Perahu is that trolling idiot "Habesha" who used to post on RAS forum, ignore the troll.
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': ^What is the RAS forum?
RAS. Race and Stuff forum, is an old defunct, inactive forum that was active from about 2003 til 2007 and Perahu is that Ethiopian troll "Habesha" who was tricked into emailing a video of himself masturbating by another poster in the forum. If it isn't him its another trolling poster called "Shouf" who has posted in this forum as Leba, the fake Somali that Djehuti called out and exposed years ago.
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': Proven. Perahu is retarded. Dienkes did *NOT* write a peer-reviewed paper, he is only a blogger who can offer opinions. He's brainwashed you man...
I was using it comically, of course I know the meaning of et al.
quote:Originally posted by Sundjata: Anyways, what idiot cites a non-geneticist blogger who uses a pseudonym as a credible source?
Dienekes is a credible source.
Posts: 695 | From: وكان المصريون القدماء القوقازين | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged |
The first solution is based on the idea that there has been a major episode of back-migration into Africa that is not captured by the standard model. Clearly, this cannot have been a recent event, as Sub-Saharan Africans largely lack (except in the North and East) certifiably West Eurasian derived markers. But, the event need not have been particularly recent: as long as it occurred after West Eurasians began to diverge from East Asians it would have established the genetic closeness observed by the authors.
I believe that the best signal of such a potential back-migration involves haplogroup E. This is the dominant patrilineage of black Africans by far, and almost certainly had an African (and probably an east African) origin. However, its sister haplogroup D occurs as a relic in Asia, among people such as Tibetans, Ainu, or Andaman Islanders. Where did the ancestral clade DE develop? If I was a betting man, I would say that somewhere between the Indian Ocean (where the Andamanese live), and East Africa.
An early movement of DE-bearing men from Arabia into East Africa would serve to bring a West Eurasian autosomal component into Africa. That component would then evolve into E in East Africa itself, and go on to (almost) completely replace pre-existing African Y-chromosomes, leaving haplogroups A and B at high frequencies in a few relic African hunter-gatherer populations.
From the Eurasian perspective, the problem would evaporate: West Eurasians' autosomal shift to Africans is not correlated with haplogroup E frequencies, because the latter was not initially associated with a Sub-Saharan-like autosomal gene pool.
Posts: 695 | From: وكان المصريون القدماء القوقازين | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by .Charlie Bass.: RAS. Race and Stuff forum, is an old defunct, inactive forum that was active from about 2003 til 2007 and Perahu is that Ethiopian troll "Habesha" who was tricked into emailing a video of himself masturbating by another poster in the forum. If it isn't him its another trolling poster called "Shouf" who has posted in this forum as Leba, the fake Somali that Djehuti called out and exposed years ago.
This explains everything! Jaimie is usually not the type of person who subscribe to outdated race-theories so when he began talking of "caucasoids" and "Hamites", my brow was raised.
He is nothing more than a sick brainwashed idiot follower of Dienekes. He is finished. Kaput! Damn, and to think we actually took this guy seriously for like 2 pages.
LMAO @ "Dienekes et. al"
The day Dienekes publishes a paper in collaboration with other experts is the day academia has collapsed!
quote:Originally posted by Pair'o'huy: Dienekes is a credible source.
LMAOH
Hilarious.
Even Wikipedia is more credible than Dienekes.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Perahu: West Eurasian Back-Migration into Africa
The first solution is based on the idea that there has been a major episode of back-migration into Africa that is not captured by the standard model. Clearly, this cannot have been a recent event, as Sub-Saharan Africans largely lack (except in the North and East) certifiably West Eurasian derived markers. But, the event need not have been particularly recent: as long as it occurred after West Eurasians began to diverge from East Asians it would have established the genetic closeness observed by the authors.
I believe that the best signal of such a potential back-migration involves haplogroup E. This is the dominant patrilineage of black Africans by far, and almost certainly had an African (and probably an east African) origin. However, its sister haplogroup D occurs as a relic in Asia, among people such as Tibetans, Ainu, or Andaman Islanders. Where did the ancestral clade DE develop? If I was a betting man, I would say that somewhere between the Indian Ocean (where the Andamanese live), and East Africa.
An early movement of DE-bearing men from Arabia into East Africa would serve to bring a West Eurasian autosomal component into Africa. That component would then evolve into E in East Africa itself, and go on to (almost) completely replace pre-existing African Y-chromosomes, leaving haplogroups A and B at high frequencies in a few relic African hunter-gatherer populations.
From the Eurasian perspective, the problem would evaporate: West Eurasians' autosomal shift to Africans is not correlated with haplogroup E frequencies, because the latter was not initially associated with a Sub-Saharan-like autosomal gene pool.
Sir, what is a paragroup?
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ LOL Indeed. With the craziness that comes from these racialists, I don't think you have to necessarily be clairvoyant or a prophet to sees such insanity coming.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Y-Haplogroup R1 and mtDNA M1 and U6 in Africa are definitely the result of Back Migration from Eurasia. Every sequencial scientific study confirms this as well. R1b1c-V88 descends from R1b1-P25 which in turn descends from R1b-M343 and R-M343* is not found in Africa but is found in Turkey. Neither is R1-M173* found in Africa. And mtDNA U6 descends from U which is definitely of Asian origin since highest diversity and frequency of mtDNA Hg U are found only in Eurasia. M1 has now been shown to be even younger than some mtDNA M Haplogroups, much younger than M2 and M2 is found mostly in India.
Posts: 171 | From: Florida | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Even if M1 and U6 are of Eurasian origin, why does that matter? These two haplogroups originated not too long after modern humans left Africa, so it's not like the first people carrying them were cold-adapted (especially since they were supposedly in southern Eurasia at that time). There's also bio-anthropological evidence that Nile Valley populations during the Late Pleistocene had tropical African affinities, so even if they had received some back-migration, it wouldn't have been cold-adapted people who were involved.
posted
^ I can forgive the ignorance of 'rainingburntice' for failing to read the valuable info of this thread from the beginning, but did you not pay attention to this thread?
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Truthcentric Avatar Image Member Member # 3735
Rate Member Icon 1 posted 12 October, 2011 05:10 PM Profile for Truthcentric Author's Homepage Send New Private Message Edit/Delete Post Reply With Quote Even if M1 and U6 are of Eurasian origin, why does that matter? These two haplogroups originated not too long after modern humans left Africa, so it's not like the first people carrying them were cold-adapted (especially since they were supposedly in southern Eurasia at that time). There's also bio-anthropological evidence that Nile Valley populations during the Late Pleistocene had tropical African affinities, so even if they had received some back-migration, it wouldn't have been cold-adapted people who were involved..............CHARLES DARWIN AND THE OUT OF AFRICA EXPERIENCE ,ANYONE HERE CARRY APE BLOOD IN THEIR VEINS.
Posts: 45 | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged |
Yes they would have been cold adapted! Because during the Upper Palaeolithic west Asia including the area of the Black Sea (most likely the area of origin of U6 since it is also found in southern Europe) was much colder then including parts of the Middle East!
Posts: 171 | From: Florida | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': Lmao, you have gone delusional. We have proven you wrong in genetics so you resort to picture spamming that has absolutely no bearing on the genetic evidence
In other words the troll has degenerated further from what semblance of higher thinking he once had.
Here are a couple of old studies based on assessment of skeletal remains.
Jean Hiernaux, Peoples of the World Series: The People of Africa (1975)
The oldest remains of Homo sapiens sapiens found in East Africa were associated with an industry having similarities with the Capsian. It has been called Upper Kenyan Capsian, although its derivation from the North African Capsian is far from certain. At Gamble's Cave in Kenya, five human skeletons were associated with a late phase of the industry, Upper Kenya Capsian C, which contains pottery. A similar associationis presumed for a skeleton found at Olduvai, which resembles those from Gamble's Cave. The date of Upper Kenya Capsian C is not precisely known (an earlier phase from Prospect Farm on Eburru Mountain close to Gamble's Cave has been dated to about 8000 BC); but the presence of pottery indicates a rather later date, perhaps around 400 BC. The skeletons are of very tall people. They had long, narrow heads, and relatively long, narrow faces. The nose was of medium width; and prognathism, when present, was restricted to the alveolar, or tooth-bearing, region......all their features can be found in several living populations of East Africa, like the Tutsi of Rwanda and Burundi, who are very dark skinned and differ greatly from Europeans in a number of body proportions............. From the foregoing, it is tempting to locate the area of differentiation of these people in the interior of East Africa. There is every reason to believe that they are ancestral to the living 'Elongated East Africans'. Neither of these populations, fossil and modern, should be considered to be closely related to the populations of Europe and western Asia.
Claims that Caucasoid peoples once lived in eastern Africa have been shown to be wrong,... - JO Vogel, Precolonial Africa
Although these sources are old, they are far from outdated since recent studies continue to prove them right including genetics.
It has been shown in hg analysis that Tutsi and others he calls "Hamitic" have no Eurasian ancestry. Now the fool brings up autosomal studies, yet he fails to name what exact autosomal genes in these studies he identifies as "Eurasian".
While we await his answer let's take a look at West Africans like the Fulani below.
No doubt the idiot would call these West Africans "Hamitic Caucasoids" as well. LOL
Indeed.
Narrow noses in Africa are a function of climate and occur not only in higher altitude East African zones but desert areas as well, plus the Sahara, due to the dryness of the air, and arid areas or cooler coastal zones. Note on the map below that a large block of narrow noses occur in part of the Angolan region, a cooler climate zone area where the Benguela Current yields cooler temperatures like that of Baja California or coastal Peru. Such micro-climates are nothing special in the tropical zone of Africa nor are narrow noses anything special among ultra diverse tropical Africans.
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rainingburntice: To Truthcentric:
Yes they would have been cold adapted! Because during the Upper Palaeolithic west Asia including the area of the Black Sea (most likely the area of origin of U6 since it is also found in southern Europe) was much colder then including parts of the Middle East!
But among the people who would pass through the region during the time those clades arose were the ancestors of Australian aborigines, Negritoes, and New Guineans. Are these populations cold-adapted now?
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ I can forgive the ignorance of 'rainingburntice' for failing to read the valuable info of this thread from the beginning, but did you not pay attention to this thread?
Sorry, I posted before reading the thread's beginning. Still, my point stands that even if those haplogroups are of Eurasian origin (unlikely as that might be), the people among whom they arose would not have been cold-adapted yet.
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
The Negritos are the people that followed the beachcombing route along the Indian Ocean 65,000 years ago, and arrived in Australia first. Some of the Australian Aborigines arrived 45,000 years ago as evidenced by their Y-DNA. Haplogroup C4 represents the more ancient inhabitants and Haplogroup K represents the migration of the latter group. This can also be shown in their physical traits. Australian Aborigines are obviously of mixed race. Some have wavy hair some have afro hair, the well developed beard growth of them shows some Ainu type admixture. The same types can be found in some New Guineas (that's why some New Guineas have promintent noses). People that looked like the Ainu 45,000 years ago migrated south to Australia and some branched into the north direction who are the Ainu. The Ainu type people were evolved to a much colder climate by 45,000 years ago which is why the Aborigines are diverse in physical traits.
Posts: 171 | From: Florida | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rainingburntice: To Truthcentric:
The Negritos are the people that followed the beachcombing route along the Indian Ocean 65,000 years ago, and arrived in Australia first. Some of the Australian Aborigines arrived 45,000 years ago as evidenced by their Y-DNA. Haplogroup C4 represents the more ancient inhabitants and Haplogroup K represents the migration of the latter group. This can also be shown in their physical traits. Australian Aborigines are obviously of mixed race. Some have wavy hair some have afro hair, the well developed beard growth of them shows some Ainu type admixture. The same types can be found in some New Guineas (that's why some New Guineas have promintent noses). People that looked like the Ainu 45,000 years ago migrated south to Australia and some branched into the north direction who are the Ainu. The Ainu type people were evolved to a much colder climate by 45,000 years ago which is why the Aborigines are diverse in physical traits.
I looked up the Y-DNA haplgroups of both Australasians and Ainu and come to the conclusion that you're bullshitting again. Ainu are mostly Haplogroup D with some being C3, not K like you're insinuating. Furthermore, if wavy hair in Australasians has anything to do with Ainu admixture, then why is it that Papuans (who are geographically closer to Eurasia) have curlier hair than mainland Australians?
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
"Furthermore, if wavy hair in Australasians has anything to do with Ainu admixture, then why is it that Papuans (who are geographically closer to Eurasia) have curlier hair than mainland Australians?"
Papuans were affected more by genetic drift because of smaller population (smaller landmass) than Australia. Same with Japan only backwards. Haplogroup C3 in Japan was of more recent origin (Satsumon culture) which is why it still shows up in the Ainu. Haplogroup D migrated to Japan first and was dominant on Japan c. 45,000 years ago. The majority of Hg D caused Hg K to go extinct in Japan through genetic drift and the physical features of the Middle Eastern types (Ainu) through centuries of admixture became somewhat significant through genetic drift as well, but the Ainu have always been mixed. This is common among island populations. There are however Ainu like types within the Indonesian region to know that's the case, with wavy hair and heavy beard growth. There is some interesting genetic evidence that suggests this though. The Upper Palaeolithic Y-DNA Haplogroups of East Asia were C,D, and K. These are spread across East Asia at low to moderate frequencies everywhere. In isolated regions of Tibet, Thailand, and India they can even be found at higher frequencies together showing close association with each other. Even in Korea the last 'stepping stone' to Japan Hg K has a frequency of 8%. And the two were connected during the Upper Palaeolithic 20,000 years ago. The only thing that explains the complete absence of Hg K in Japan is extinction by genetic drift.
Posts: 171 | From: Florida | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Future ancient Y-DNA studies on the oldest Jomon remains will no doubt show that Y-Hg K was present in Japan during the Upper Palaeolithic.
Posts: 171 | From: Florida | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
WTF?!!![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic