posted
The reality that King Tut carried the y-chromosome R1b does not make him Western European.
Although R-V88 (Rlb1a) is predominate R-M173 among Central Africans like the Chadic speakers and Bantu groups.
The frequency of R1b among West African groups: Fulani, Mandekan,and Pygmy range between 86-100% according to Crusiani et al,2010.
This means that King Tut can be Rb1 and still be African.
This adds additional support to Wally's evidence that many Egyptians were West Africans. .
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
The frequency of M173 is greater in Africa than Eurasia.
Abu-Amero,KK, Hellani A, Gonzalez AN, Larruga JM, Cabrera VM, Underhill, PA. 2009. BMC Genetics, 10:59 doi:10.1186/1471-2156-10-59. Retrieved 04/30/2010 at: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2156/10/59 claims that in Asia the frequency of haplotype M173 is as follows: Anatolia 0.19%, Iran 2.67%, Iraq 0.49% Oman 1.0%, Pakistan 0.57% and Oman 1.0% . This contrast sharply with the widespread distribution of R-V88 in Africa, that ranges between 7-95% and averages 39% ; but no trace of Eurasiatic maternal lineages in West Central Africa.
In West Africa, the frequency of R1b ranges between 86-100%.
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^Stop it Clyde! Have some damn honesty w/your scholarship. You are supposed to be an academic, for pete's sake!!!! If you are going to present the study and their authors, do so in whole and not in part.
"R1b1a is found in northern Cameroon in west central Africa at a very high frequency, where it is considered to be caused by a pre-Islamic movement of people from Eurasia."[9][12]
And that is how those regions in Africa carry the R1b. It arrived there from outside Africa. Tut is of western Asian extract. Stop the shanagins dude.
Sources:
[9] a b c d Wood, ET; Stover, DA; Ehret, C; Destro-Bisol, G; Spedini, G; Mcleod, H; Louie, L; Bamshad, M et al. (2005). "Contrasting patterns of Y chromosome and mtDNA variation in Africa: evidence for sex-biased demographic processes.". European journal of human genetics : EJHG 13 (7): 867–76. doi:10.1038/sj.ejhg.5201408. PMID 15856073. http://hammerlab.biosci.arizona.edu/publications/Wood_2005_EUR.pdf.
[12] Cruciani, F; Santolamazza, P; Shen, P; Macaulay, V; Moral, P; Olckers, A; Modiano, D; Holmes, S et al. (2002). "A back migration from Asia to sub-Saharan Africa is supported by high-resolution analysis of human Y-chromosome haplotypes.". American journal of human genetics 70 (5): 1197–214. doi:10.1086/340257. PMID 11910562. , pp. 13–14
-------------------- Will destroy all Black Lies Posts: 2025 | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gigantic: ^^Stop it Clyde! Have some damn honesty w/your scholarship. You are supposed to be an academic, for pete's sake!!!! If you are going to present the study and their authors, do so in whole and not in part.
"R1b1a is found in northern Cameroon in west central Africa at a very high frequency, where it is considered to be caused by a pre-Islamic movement of people from Eurasia."[9][12]
And that is how those regions in Africa carry the R1b. It arrived there from outside Africa. Tut is of western Asian extract. Stop the shanagins dude.
Sources:
[9] a b c d Wood, ET; Stover, DA; Ehret, C; Destro-Bisol, G; Spedini, G; Mcleod, H; Louie, L; Bamshad, M et al. (2005). "Contrasting patterns of Y chromosome and mtDNA variation in Africa: evidence for sex-biased demographic processes.". European journal of human genetics : EJHG 13 (7): 867–76. doi:10.1038/sj.ejhg.5201408. PMID 15856073. http://hammerlab.biosci.arizona.edu/publications/Wood_2005_EUR.pdf.
[12] Cruciani, F; Santolamazza, P; Shen, P; Macaulay, V; Moral, P; Olckers, A; Modiano, D; Holmes, S et al. (2002). "A back migration from Asia to sub-Saharan Africa is supported by high-resolution analysis of human Y-chromosome haplotypes.". American journal of human genetics 70 (5): 1197–214. doi:10.1086/340257. PMID 11910562. , pp. 13–14
I am not talking about R-V88. Check out the table in Cruciani,F., Trombetta,B., Sellitto, D., Massaia,A. destroy-Bisol,G., Watson, E., Colomb, E.B. 2010. Eur J. Hum Genet.,(6 January 2010) doi:10.1038/ejhg.2009.231: 1-8.
quote:Originally posted by Gigantic-Ass: "R1b1a is found in northern Cameroon in west central Africa at a very high frequency, where it is considered to be caused by a pre-Islamic movement of people from Eurasia."[9][12]
And that is how those regions in Africa carry the R1b. It arrived there from outside Africa. Tut is of western Asian extract. Stop the shanagins dude.
Sources:
[9] a b c d Wood, ET; Stover, DA; Ehret, C; Destro-Bisol, G; Spedini, G; Mcleod, H; Louie, L; Bamshad, M et al. (2005). "Contrasting patterns of Y chromosome and mtDNA variation in Africa: evidence for sex-biased demographic processes.". European journal of human genetics : EJHG 13 (7): 867–76. doi:10.1038/sj.ejhg.5201408. PMID 15856073. http://hammerlab.biosci.arizona.edu/publications/Wood_2005_EUR.pdf.
[12] Cruciani, F; Santolamazza, P; Shen, P; Macaulay, V; Moral, P; Olckers, A; Modiano, D; Holmes, S et al. (2002). "A back migration from Asia to sub-Saharan Africa is supported by high-resolution analysis of human Y-chromosome haplotypes.". American journal of human genetics 70 (5): 1197–214. doi:10.1086/340257. PMID 11910562. , pp. 13–14
This theory of pre-Islamic movements into West Africa has yet to be verified and at the moment is only a hypothesis. Strange that there is no archaeological let alone historical evidence from any of these peoples for a West Asian origin. In fact according to Cruciani this movement was probably so early in time as to have taken place during Paleolithic times. However, Cruciani fails to explain why West and Central Africans have upstream even underived markers of R1* at even higher frequencies than any in the Middle East which ironically enough are found in Egypt and Southern Arabia-- both the exit points for humans entering West Asia. Again, all of this was discussed before. Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
LONDON (Reuters) - Up to 70 percent of British men and half of all Western European men are related to the Egyptian Pharaoh Tutankhamun, geneticists in Switzerland said.
Scientists at Zurich-based DNA genealogy centre, iGENEA, reconstructed the DNA profile of the boy Pharaoh, who ascended the throne at the age of nine, his father Akhenaten and grandfather Amenhotep III, based on a film that was made for the Discovery Channel.
The results showed that King Tut belonged to a genetic profile group, known as haplogroup R1b1a2, to which more than 50 percent of all men in Western Europe belong, indicating that they share a common ancestor.
Among modern-day Egyptians this haplogroup contingent is below 1 percent, according to iGENEA.
"It was very interesting to discover that he belonged to a genetic group in Europe -- there were many possible groups in Egypt that the DNA could have belonged to," said Roman Scholz, director of the iGENEA Centre.
Around 70 percent of Spanish and 60 percent of French men also belong to the genetic group of the Pharaoh who ruled Egypt more than 3,000 years ago.
"We think the common ancestor lived in the Caucasus about 9,500 years ago," Scholz told Reuters.
It is estimated that the earliest migration of haplogroup R1b1a2 into Europe began with the spread of agriculture in 7,000 BC, according to iGENEA.
However, the geneticists were not sure how Tutankhamun's paternal lineage came to Egypt from its region of origin.
The centre is now using DNA testing to search for the closest living relatives of "King Tut."
"The offer has only been publicised for three days but we have already seen a lot of interest," Scholz told Reuters.
R1-M269 does not indicate that King Tut was caucasoid. It is further confirmation of the African origin of King Tut given the greatest diversity of R1-M173 in Africa.
Y-chromosome V88 (R1b1a) has its highest frequency among Chadic speakers, while the carriers of V88 among Niger-Congo speakers (predominately Bantu people) range between 2-66% ( Cruciani et al, 2010; Bernielle-Lee et al, 2009). Haplogroup V88 includes the mutations M18, V35 and V7. Cruciani et al (2010) revealed that R-V88 is also carried by Eurasians including the distinctive mutations M18, V35 and V7.
R1b1-P25 is found in Western Eurasia. Haplogroup R1b1* is found in Africa at various frequencies. Berniell-Lee et al (2009) found in their study that 5.2% carried Rb1*. The frequency of R1b1* among the Bantu ranged from 2-20. The bearers of R1b1* among the Pygmy populations ranged from 1-25% (Berniell-Lee et al, 2009). The frequency of R1b1 among Guinea-Bissau populations was 12% (Carvalho et al,2010).
Y-Chromosome R1-M173 was probably spread in Western Europe first by African Roman soldiers, and later by African Muslims when they conquered Western Europe as Moors. This would explain why 60-70% French and Spanish males carry this y-haplogroup.
Around 0.1 of Sub Saharan Africans carry R1b1b2. Wood et al (2009) found that Khoisan (2.2%) and Niger-Congo (0.4%) speakers carried the R-M269 y-chromosome. The Niger-Congo speakers formed a significant population in the nomes of Upper Egypt, where the founders of the 18th dynasty originated.
Haplogroup R1b1b2 was probably taken to Europe by African Roman soldiers. Africans were first recorded in the Western Europe 1800 years ago, as Roman soldiers defending Hadrian's Wall. There was a skeleton African Roman soilder recently found in Britain.
Other Africans were found in Britain including the Rich African women called the bangled lady.
These skeletons show how heavily integrated Africans were in western Europe. This would explain the widespread nature of y-chromosome R1-M173 in Europe.
In addition to R1-M173 in western Europe, the African y-chromosome haplogroup A1 was also recently found in Britain.
posted
^ Hey Winters, the woman above has NOTHING to do with R1b which is a male lineage, and King Tut does NOT even carry R1b to begin with!! That was a rumor started by Euronuts who confused a control group for the NRY testing of Tut! You're obviously very slow when it comes to these things aren't you. Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Hey Winters, the woman above has NOTHING to do with R1b which is a male lineage, and King Tut does NOT even carry R1b to begin with!! That was a rumor started by Euronuts who confused a control group for the NRY testing of Tut! You're obviously very slow when it comes to these things aren't you.
The fact that Clyde keeps pandering to Eurocentrists suggests that he has no fight in him, which is why he easily concedes to their nonsense shenanigans. I am definitely losing the ounce of respect that I had for the guy.
Posts: 4021 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric: ^ Who in this thread is claiming that ancient Egyptians were of West/Central African stock?
Clyde Winters obviously
Fair enough, but still I'm sick of your constantly emphasizing the differences between West Africans and Egyptians as if they had nothing in common despite both having a Saharan heritage. You seem threatened by the idea that West and Central Africans or anyone descended from them can have any kind of connection, fraternal or otherwise, to ancient Egypt. Now why is that?
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by KoKaKoLa: Tut was neither European nor west/central african, get over it. He was a E1B1B1A carrier without a doubt and looked more like a black from Egypt (Fellahin, Beja) and North Sudan than anything else.
and i bet you that he was Beja or at least part Beja since, he looked like one, and since some of them descend from the pharoahs of the New kingdom.
Tut was not European neither west /entral africans. His features (and of the rest of his family) talk by themselves.
Stop the foolishness
The New Kingdom pharaohs were thebans therefore NATIVE EGYPTIANS .
SmH
Egypt was a Pan-African civilization that included West Africans. In fact many of the sothern Nomes were probably made up of West African populations.
Inyotef 1
Wm. E. Welmers identified the Niger Congo home land. Welmers in "Niger-Congo Mande", Current trends in Linguistics 7 (1971), pp.113-140,explained that the Niger-Congo homeland was in the vicinity of the upper Nile valley (p.119). He believes that the Westward migration began 5000 years ago.
In support of this theory he discusses the dogs of the Niger-Congo speakers. This is the unique barkless Basenji dogs which live in the Sudan and Uganda today, but were formerly recorded on Egyptian monuments (Wlemers,p.119). According to Welmers the Basanji, is related to the Liberian Basenji breed of the Kpelle and Loma people of Liberia. Welmers believes that the Mande took these dogs with them on their migration westward. The Kpelle and Loma speak Mande languages.
He believes that the region was unoccupied when the Mande migrated westward. In support of this theory Welmers' notes that the Liberian Banji dogs ,show no cross-breeding with dogs kept by other African groups in West Africa, and point to the early introduction of this cannine population after the separation of the Mande from the other Niger-Congo speakers in the original upper Nile homeland for this population. As a result, he claims that the Mande migration occured before these groups entered the region.
Homburger made it clear that the Fula language was related to the Egyptians of the 12th Dynasty. This is interesting because we find that at this time new rulers came to power in Egypt from the South. This period is often called the Middle Kingdom.
Many of these “southerners” probably included many people who later settled West Africa. As noted earlier the marker for the spread of the Niger-Congo speakers is the basanji dog. The hieroglyphic for "dog," in fact, as evidenced on a stele from the Middle Kingdom of Egypt, derives from the basenji. In just a few strokes, the engraver captures the key characteristics: pricked ears, curled tail and graceful carriage. It is probably no coincidence that the Basanji was see as the principal dog it probably represents the coming of power of the Niger-Congo speakers in ancient Egypt.
We know that in African societies great ancestors are made into “gods”. This is interesting because Wally has discovered a number of African ethnonyms among the gods of Egyptian nomes.
quote:
Originally posted by Wally:
Ethnic names in the Mdu Ntr
Tutsi Tutsi "the assembled gods"; "all of them (gods)"
Akan Akan - the name of a god Akaniu - a class of gods like Osiris
Fante Fante - "he of the nose" - a name of Thoth - one of the 42 judges in the Hall of Osiris ("Shante" in modern Egyptian)
Hausa Hosa - a singing god
Yoruba Ourbaiu - great of souls, a title of gods or kings Ouruba - Great God of soul
The permutations of names of such folks as the Wolof or the Fulani are so many, that it requires the effort of those who speak the language, to properly interpret the names -ie, Djoloff, Oulof, etc. and then look for their meanings in Budge's dictionary...
It would be quite interesting if these nomes were formerly prominent southern nomes who gained prominence once the Inyotefs came to power.
Between 2258 2052 BC civil war broke out among the nobles of Egypt. During this period of disunity there was much suffering in the land and many of the fine cultural developments of the Old Kingdoms were discarded or rarely practiced. This period of chaos is called the "First Intermediate Period". A person who lived during this hard time named Iperwer, wrote Great and humble say: "I wish I might die". Little children cry out: "I never should have been born". Also during this time Lower Egypt was invaded by Asian people who ruled there for a long time.
During this period of decline it was the Southerners who made it possible for the raise of Egypt back into a world power. These Southerners were called "Inyotefs", they lived around a city in Upper Egypt called "Thebes". Inyotef I founded the 11th Dynasty and made Thebes his capital.Inyotef declared himself king c 2125-2112 BC.
Inyotef I opposed Ankhtify of Heracleopolitan who he defeated. It was Inyotef who consolidated power in the south. Inyotef II (Wahankh) also fought the Heracleopolitans. He loved dogs especially the basenji.
Egyptian Basenji Dog Hieroglyph
I believe that some of the southern nomes led by the Inyotefs were composed of people who later migrated to West Africa after the Romans came to power. The Thebians were closely united with the Nubians.
Inyotef I was the father Mentuhotep I. Several of the wives of Mentuhotep II were Nubians. Under Mentuhotep, the delta chiefs were defeated and Egypt was united again into one country.
Mentuhotep
Under the Amenemhet I, of the Xllth dynasty the capital was moved form Thebes to Lisht near Memphis. This dynasty and those thereafter are called the Middle Kingdom.
MIDDLE KINGDOM
It took strong leadership for the Egyptians to re establish the greatness of Egypt and the establishment of safe and secure borders.
The rulers during the Middle Kingdom were mostly men from the military. They frequently made raids into foreign lands in search of booty. And for the first time in Egyptian history a permanent army was founded to protect Egypt and keep it strong.
Amon became the major God of the Egyptians during the Middle Period. Amon was recognized at this time as the God of all Gods. This Amon was also called Amma by the Proto Saharans.
It is interesting to note that the Mande and other West African people like the Dogon and Dravidians worshipped the god Amma.
The fact that Mande, Wolof and Fula are related to Egyptian is probably due to the fact that when the Inyotefs took over Egypt the ancestors of these groups live in southern Egypt/Upper Kush. This would explain 1) the relationship between the Fula and Egyptian language of the 12th Dynasty 2) the introduction of the worship of Aman to the Egyptians a god worshipped by many Niger-Congo speakers, 3) the presence of Egyptian gods for selected nomes bearing West African ethnonyms and 4)the love of the basenji dog by the 12th Dynasty Egyptians.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Hey Winters, the woman above has NOTHING to do with R1b which is a male lineage, and King Tut does NOT even carry R1b to begin with!! That was a rumor started by Euronuts who confused a control group for the NRY testing of Tut! You're obviously very slow when it comes to these things aren't you.
The fact that Clyde keeps pandering to Eurocentrists suggests that he has no fight in him, which is why he easily concedes to their nonsense shenanigans. I am definitely losing the ounce of respect that I had for the guy.
LOL. There is nothing to fight about, R1-M173 was spread by Africans any Europeans carrying this gene has a recent African heritage.
One day if you earn a PhD you may undersstand how to conduct research and write history. But I don't feel you will contribute anything to ancient Black history because you lack a firm foundation in Afrocentric research methods and philosophy. Absence of this base will probably make you a coward like most other AA PhDs in history and etc.
Your lack of respect of Afrocentric researchers is nothing new. Frankly, I don't care if you respect me or not. Your behavior on this site and lack of respect of Marc and Mike, show that you will not contribute anything worthwhile to this field of study until you believe in AA researchers.
posted
^I believe wholeheartedly in my fellow Black researchers, just intelligent ones who don't use race as a cop-out. If you consider your counter-cultural esque/segregationist methodology as anything but cowardly then this is definitely delusion talking. I do not support ANYONE who believes that an entire group of people are intellectually or morally deficient based on some melanin deficiency and a gross ignorance [of albinism] and massive misuse of the word "albino".
If you call this "Afrocentric", then no, I will NEVER contribute anything to your version of Afrocentricity. Yours is an ignoble exercise in petty reverse racism that the average AA would be disgusted by. My mistake was indeed reserving respect for you solely based on your experience, academic accomplishments and exhaustive efforts (you indeed have good intentions), but your philosophy, while mature and deeply rooted in AA schools of thought, is flawed and parochial.
People like Mike and Marc are lazy. They are cowards because they can't beat Eurocentric academics at their own game. They have to make up their own elaborate fairy tales that frankly, aren't even as convincing. They separate themselves from the mainstream in an attempt to lure AAs away from it and isolate us to some fringe status, bathing in the light of some objective truth that can only be known to us.
This is B.S., sorry. I respect all past Afrocentric scholars as markers of history and potential influences on my own education and philosophy, but not as a foundation to racial solidarity where I drool over every word written or spoken as some untainted truth. If anything that earning a PHD should have taught you is how to be critical. The main point is that you know very well the King Tut issue is actually a non-issue but to promote your crack pot agenda you ignore this. It is sickening and cowardly. In one instance you run away from whites, in the next relying on their hearsay to promote some irrelevant thesis of yours. Rich. Posts: 4021 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Sundjata: ^I believe wholeheartedly in my fellow Black researchers, just intelligent ones who don't use race as a cop-out. If you consider your counter-cultural esque/segregationist methodology as anything but cowardly then this is definitely delusion talking. I do not support ANYONE who believes that an entire group of people are intellectually or morally deficient based on some melanin deficiency and a gross ignorance and massive misuse of the condition called "albinism".
If you call this "Afrocentric", then no, I will NEVER contribute anything to your version of Afrocentricity. Yours is an ignoble exercise in petty reverse racism that the average AA would be disgusted by. My mistake was indeed reserving respect for you solely based on your academic accomplishments and exhaustive efforts, but your philosophy, while mature and deeply rooted, is flawed and parochial.
People like Mike and Marc are lazy. They are cowards because they can't beat Eurocentric academics at their own game. They have to make up their own elaborate fairy tales that frankly, aren't even as convincing. They separate themselves from the mainstream in an attempt to lure AAs away from it and isolate us to some fringe status, bathing in the light of some objective truth that can only be known to us.
This is B.S., sorry. I respect all past Afrocentric scholars as markers of history and potential influences on my own education and philosophy, but not as a foundation to racial solidarity where I drool over every word written or spoken as some untainted truth. The main point is that you know very well the King Tut issue is actually a non-issue but to promote your crack pot agenda you ignore this. It is sickening and cowardly. In one instance you run away from whites, in the next relying on their hearsay to promote some irrelevant thesis of yours. Rich.
LOL. There are no AA researchers of ancient history accepted by the European mainstream.
If you know of any post their names and research.
LOL. Your need to be accepted by the Academe insures that you will contribute nothing to the field. YOU SAID tHAT
quote:
This is B.S., sorry. I respect all past Afrocentric scholars as markers of history and potential influences on my own education and philosophy, but not as a foundation to racial solidarity where I drool over every word written or spoken as some untainted truth.
The above betrys your self-hate. AA researchers have never wanted people to support them based on race--they did good research and supported their findings with the latest citations.You fail to respect the work of AAs, while you 'drool" over the work of Ehret and other Europeans.
If DuBois had felt like you we would never of had a J.A Rogers or Diop. BOTH SCHOLARS RECOGNIZE HIS WORK AS THE FOUNDATION OF THEIR STUDY.
How do you intend to conduct relevant research when you have no research heroes in your field of study that look like you ?
PS: Don't claim you follow Keita, who is a medical doctor-not anthropologists.
posted
It baffels me that it took you this long to come to such a conclusion. Clyde Winters is a Fraud, though he has more academic grounding than the likes of Mike, he is a fraud no less.
The R1b issiue is just the newest stunt, Clyde has done this before.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:LOL. There are no AA researchers of ancient history accepted by the European mainstream.
If you know of any post their names and research.
LOL. Your need to be accepted by the Academe insures that you will contribute nothing to the field. YOU SAID tHAT
You have a self-defeating attitude. Once your arguments transcend racial logic, you won't need to ask that question. The REAL fight is in the trailblazing, not the scurrying off into some corner teaching your own cultic brand of Afrocentricity.
Anyways, in my view someone like a S.O.Y. Keita (discussed here ad naseum) is a good model for me to expand on.
quote:The above betrys your self-hate. AA researchers have never wanted people to support them based on race--they did good research and supported their findings with the latest citations.You fail to respect the work of AAs, while you 'drool" over the work of Ehret and other Europeans.
If DuBois had felt like you we would never of had a J.A Rogers or Diop. BOTH SCHOLARS RECOGNIZE HIS WORK AS THE FOUNDATION OF THEIR STUDY.
How do you intend to conduct relevant research when you have no research heroes in your field of study ?
But you want me to respect Mike and Marc's "research" because of their race. You are just being romantic. Diop himself called for black scholars to move BEYOND this foundation and in a way that he actually opened himself up to respectful criticism. Respect is one thing, but being stuck in the past is another thing entirely. What does having a personal hero have to do with proper method? You write that as if I'm open to pick and choose, as long as it's some nameless Black scholar from the 19th/20th century (either Du Bois or insert name here).
Posts: 4021 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
PS: Don't claim you follow Keita, who is a medical doctor-not anthropologists.
Who told you that he was only a medical doctor? The man earned his PHD in Biological Anthropology at Oxford under Prof. A.J. Boyce and was secondarily trained in Egyptology by Prof. John Banes. He also studied anthropometry under Larry Angel so someone has definitely mislead you.
Posts: 4021 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:LOL. There are no AA researchers of ancient history accepted by the European mainstream.
If you know of any post their names and research.
LOL. Your need to be accepted by the Academe insures that you will contribute nothing to the field. YOU SAID tHAT
You have a self-defeating attitude. Once your arguments transcend racial logic, you won't need to ask that question. The REAL fight is in the trailblazing, not the scurrying off into some corner teaching your own cultic brand of Afrocentricity.
Anyways, in my view someone like a S.O.Y. Keita (discussed here ad naseum) is a good model for me to expand on.
quote:The above betrys your self-hate. AA researchers have never wanted people to support them based on race--they did good research and supported their findings with the latest citations.You fail to respect the work of AAs, while you 'drool" over the work of Ehret and other Europeans.
If DuBois had felt like you we would never of had a J.A Rogers or Diop. BOTH SCHOLARS RECOGNIZE HIS WORK AS THE FOUNDATION OF THEIR STUDY.
How do you intend to conduct relevant research when you have no research heroes in your field of study ?
But you want me to respect Mike and Marc's "research" because of their race. You are just being romantic. Diop himself called for black scholars to move BEYOND this foundation and in a way that he actually opened himself up to respectful criticism. Respect is one thing, but being stuck in the past is another thing entirely. What does having a personal hero have to do with proper method? You write that as if I'm open to pick and choose, as long as it's some nameless Black scholar from the 19th/20th century (either Du Bois or insert name here).
Yes I feel you should respect Mike and Marc, because most of what they teach is based on the Afrocentric research tradition. We don't agree on everything but we do respect each other.
Having a personal AA hero in Afrocentric research is important because Afrocentrism is based on falsification. This means that you find a scholar who researched a particular area and conduct research to confirm or disconfirm his theories. This is science. Kuhn (1996) noted that: Normal science consists in the actualization of that promise, an actualization achieved by extending the knowledge of those facts that the paradigm displays as particularly revealing, by increasing the extent of the match between those facts and the paradigm's predictions, and by further articulation of the paradigm itself (p.24).
For example, J.A. Rogers and DuBois discussed the presence of Blacks in ancient America. Their research inspired me to do research on the Olmecs. Using epigraphy and anthropology I have been able to confirm their theories and extend the research in the field.
Finch and others were inspired to do Egyptological research by Diop. Modeling their theories on the work of Diop led them to produce work confirming Diop's research.
These examples make it clear you don't conduct research without following the methods and findings established by heroes in the field.
Psychologically people have a tendency to want to be with their own race or nationality. As a result, researchers usually seek mentors from their own natinality.
For someone to say they have no affinity to scholars of their own race because they did research in the past indicates a lack of self-esteem and self-hate. Clearly, you feel that any Black whoes research is not certified by Europeans do not deserve your respect.
You have made this your karma. Since you don't respect other Black researchers, you find that your research is not respected--this is why Explorer acted as if you were a retard.
This will probably carry over into your professional career , if you make it as professional anthropologist, due to your lack of self-esteem you will probably not publish any work unless it is okayed by some European you respect/worship.
Anything you write that is groundbreaking in relation to African ancient history will be found unacceptable by your European mentor/hero, since Europeans are not interested in proving the Egyptians are Black. You have no self-esteem or love for your people/race so 9 to 1, your dissertation will be on a topic chosen by your advisor.
LOL. Due to your self-hate and need for Europeans to legitimize your research--as most negroes you may publish on the topic of your dissertation the rest of your professional career so your colleagues will respect you as the perfect negro, waiting for Massa to give you permission on what to write about.
But like most AA professors I know you will avoid research and try to be just a teacher, and be jealous of AA researchers like myself who publish. Your lack of self-esteem and self-hate will make you a bitter and hateful man.
This is your future when you have no AA research heroes to inspire your research.
Where does Diop say you should not respect Black scholars? He acknowledge that he was guided in his research by Dubois.
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Egypt Boy King Tut’s Lineage Discovered in Half of Europeans
By IBTimes Staff Reporter | August 2, 2011 4:19 AM EDT
"...The male descendants of pharaohs are still around! A new study suggests that most of the European men share the DNA of the most famous Egyptian pharaoh, Tutankhamun, also called the boy King Tut.
According to geneticists at Switzerland-based iGENEA DNA genealogy test center, up to 70 percent of British men and half of all Western European men are related to King Tut.
iGENEA reconstructed the DNA profile of the boy king in 2009 after carrying out extended DNA-tests with the mummy of Tutankamun and other members of his family, including his father Akhenaten and his grandfather Amenhotep III.
The result of the DNA-tests showed that King Tut belonged to haplogroup R1b1a2, which more than 50 percent of all men in Western Europe belong to, iGENEA said in a statement.
The R1b1a2-lineage is believed to have originated about 9,500 years ago in the Black Sea region, researchers said, adding that the haplogroup began to migrate to Europe with the spread of agriculture since 7,000 BC...."
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Clyde Winters recycling the same bull*** over and over again. Egypt was not a Pan African civilization unless you believe in fantasies and fairy tales
Anthropology, Genetics and History clearly debunks your idea of the Pan African Egypt. Modern Egyptians are close with Middle easterns and East Africans. Not with the west/central africans (and the europeans)
Mande Fula and Wolof were not part of Ancient Egypt and never will be. And the XII was not related to them. Its known that the first ruler of the XII dynasty, Amenemhat I , was a Beja (and looked like one). No Mande, No Wolof, No Fula.
Choke on that
"I believe that some of the southern nomes led by the Inyotefs were composed of people who later migrated to West Africa after the Romans came to power. The Thebians were closely united with the Nubians. " I believe i can fly too. Nubians show no genetical relations with West africans. However they do with their Egyptian neighbour (obviously) Upper Egyptians are not even related to the west africans ! There is no known migration from Egypt to West Africa especially during the last dynasties. Egyptians didnt talk about it. Greeks didnt talk about it. And there is no anthropological evidences that lead to this conclusion. You just made it up by yourself.
Where are your genetical proofs? anthropological proofs? phenotypical proofs? historical proofs? NONE! Posts: 558 | From: forum | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by tigerlily_misr: Egypt Boy King Tut’s Lineage Discovered in Half of Europeans
By IBTimes Staff Reporter | August 2, 2011 4:19 AM EDT
"...The male descendants of pharaohs are still around! A new study suggests that most of the European men share the DNA of the most famous Egyptian pharaoh, Tutankhamun, also called the boy King Tut.
According to geneticists at Switzerland-based iGENEA DNA genealogy test center, up to 70 percent of British men and half of all Western European men are related to King Tut.
iGENEA reconstructed the DNA profile of the boy king in 2009 after carrying out extended DNA-tests with the mummy of Tutankamun and other members of his family, including his father Akhenaten and his grandfather Amenhotep III.
The result of the DNA-tests showed that King Tut belonged to haplogroup R1b1a2, which more than 50 percent of all men in Western Europe belong to, iGENEA said in a statement.
The R1b1a2-lineage is believed to have originated about 9,500 years ago in the Black Sea region, researchers said, adding that the haplogroup began to migrate to Europe with the spread of agriculture since 7,000 BC...."
LONDON (Reuters) - Up to 70 percent of British men and half of all Western European men are related to the Egyptian Pharaoh Tutankhamun, geneticists in Switzerland said.
Scientists at Zurich-based DNA genealogy centre, iGENEA, reconstructed the DNA profile of the boy Pharaoh, who ascended the throne at the age of nine, his father Akhenaten and grandfather Amenhotep III, based on a film that was made for the Discovery Channel.
The results showed that King Tut belonged to a genetic profile group, known as haplogroup R1b1a2, to which more than 50 percent of all men in Western Europe belong, indicating that they share a common ancestor.
Among modern-day Egyptians this haplogroup contingent is below 1 percent, according to iGENEA.
"It was very interesting to discover that he belonged to a genetic group in Europe -- there were many possible groups in Egypt that the DNA could have belonged to," said Roman Scholz, director of the iGENEA Centre.
Around 70 percent of Spanish and 60 percent of French men also belong to the genetic group of the Pharaoh who ruled Egypt more than 3,000 years ago.
"We think the common ancestor lived in the Caucasus about 9,500 years ago," Scholz told Reuters.
It is estimated that the earliest migration of haplogroup R1b1a2 into Europe began with the spread of agriculture in 7,000 BC, according to iGENEA.
However, the geneticists were not sure how Tutankhamun's paternal lineage came to Egypt from its region of origin.
The centre is now using DNA testing to search for the closest living relatives of "King Tut."
"The offer has only been publicised for three days but we have already seen a lot of interest," Scholz told Reuters.
"Paul Casciato has been a correspondent and editor for Reuters News Agency since 1992. He has reported and edited a wide range of political, general news and business stories that run the gamut from war to wage inflation. He has reported from Toronto, New York, London, Dublin, Jerusalem, the West Bank, Kenya, Tanzania, Washington, the Balkans, Kuwait, Bahrain and Iraq. He is currently in charge of lifestyle news for Europe, the Middle East and Africa."
He forgot to mention in his so-called report that Siwa-Berbers speak an Afroasiatic language and carry the R1b-haplo up to 25%. And have lived in that region for 10.000 years and still maintain doing so.
These lying crocks of racist sh*t need to be dealt with hard.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by KoKaKoLa: Tut was neither European nor west/central african, get over it. He was a E1B1B1A carrier without a doubt and looked more like a black from Egypt (Fellahin, Beja) and North Sudan than anything else.
and i bet you that he was Beja or at least part Beja since, he looked like one, and since some of them descend from the pharoahs of the New kingdom.
Tut was not European neither west /entral africans. His features (and of the rest of his family) talk by themselves.
Stop the foolishness
The New Kingdom pharaohs were thebans therefore NATIVE EGYPTIANS .
SmH
As much as you are right about the groups you've mentioned, do you truly believe ancient Africans did not migrate over/ on the continent?
Oromo's are the second largest African group/ tribe of people next to the Fulani. Some Oromo's moved to West-Africas Sahel and vice versa, West-Africans moved to East and the North-East.
Therefore lingusticly, Afroasiatic is the most widespread language base in Africa, North-West, North-East, East, including West African regions.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
1) The Ribia profile occurs in LESS THAN 1% of modern Egyptians. Per IGNEA itself: quote-"In Egypt the contingent of this haplogroup is below 1%.."(http://www.igenea.com/en/index.php?c=62). Assorted "HDB" racists like to talk about "continuity" of the ancients into modern times, and here they are hoist on their own petard. If Tut's DNA is "more related to Europeans" and such DNA is of trivial occurrence in today's Egypt, then their precious "Caucasoid Egypt" is blown out of the water, and shown for the trivial chump change that it is.
2) The minor trivia that is R1b1a2 occurs mostly in northern Egypt, but even here assorted "biodiversity" celebrations come up short. Among its strong representatives are peoples of the Siwa Oasis, (Cruciani et al 2010. Y-chromosome of R-V88) people who cluster mostly with Sub-Saharan Africans than Europeans or "Middle Easterners" (COudray et al 2008)
3) Even sOme "biodiversity" types are waffling over the latest revelation. On Dinkines blog, he mocked iGNEA earlier for using too broad categories, now he also is unsure about the new Tut findings noting that the Y-Chromosome of Tut has never been scientifically published and validated, and that credible scientists find reported claims about Tut's DNA to be sloppy science work. See: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20014-royal-rumpus-over-king-tutankhamuns-ancestry.html
IGNAEA continues use of the same shaky methods. Direct sequencing of YTtTut data was not done. They used a proxy method of analysis, filmed by the discovery Channel. QUOTE: "iGENEA was able to reconstruct the Y-DNA profile of Tutankhamun, his father Akhenaten and his grandfather Amenhotep III with the help of a recording of the Discovery Channel."
So much for "Aryan" celebrations re their bogus "Caucasoid" Egypt.
-------------------- Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began.. Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
It is clear that since R1b1a2 is found among Africans the possibility that King Tut carried this gene does not make him caucasoid.Tut was a Black African like the other Blacks who carry this haplogroup today.
It is sad that researchers here have a ghettoized view of African genetics in which Europeans have defined for them who is Black, and who is admixed with Europeans. Hg R1b1a2 is of African origin. But like puppets the researchers here parrot the views of European genetists instead of using the genetic evidence to reach their own conclusions.
.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Careful, phylogenetic nomenclature changes every year but the markers delineating haplogroups are not subject to change. The changes in phylogeny that R-M269 has gone through per Wiki: From 2003 to 2005; R1b3. From 2005 to 2008; R1b1c. From 2008 to 2011; R1b1b2
Long story short: R1b1a2 is now equivalent to R-M269 not R-V88. Refer to hg by marker to never be downlevel.
Sidebar @ all: AFAIK R-M269 doesn't even amount to 1% in any African population, that's less than a penny out of a dollar, quite trivial and totally insignificant.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oddly, the subclade/ downstream R1b1b2a1a2f2 in North Africans is from 0 to 4% in frequency.
R1b-M412 appears to be the most common Y-chromosome haplogroup in Western Europe (470%), while being virtually absent in the Near East, the Caucasus and West Asia
Anglo-Saxon - This haplotype is formally known as R1b1b2a2g and has been known since 2005. Members of this cluster have the single nucleotide polymorphism U152 (or S28). Populations with this SNP are concentrated in alpine Germany and Switzerland and are thought to be associated with the La Tene Celtic culture. It has not been discovered in Irish or Spanish populations and may have come to Britain between the 5th and 8th centuries A.D. with Anglo-Saxon, Dane, Frisian, Jute and Frankish migrants to southeastern England and lowland Scotland.
Irish 1 - Members of this cluster are descendants of the semi-mythical Irish King, Niall of the Nine Hostages or one of his male relatives. Niall is thought to have lived in the late 4th and early 5th centuries. His prolific descendants ruled Ulster and Leinster between the 6th and 10th centuries A.D. This cluster shares a common ancestor with the Irish 2 cluster between 4,500 and 1,500 years ago. Members of this cluster share a single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) marker at M222. The subclade is formally known as R1b1b2a1a2f2 and is especially associated with Scottish and Irish populations. It is likely to have entered Scotland through the Dalriadic migrations of the 6th to 8th Centuries A.D. (see Irish 2 below). Both clusters share the L21 SNP mutation that defines their common subclade.
Irish 2 – A member of this cluster completed extensive SNP testing of his haplotype in late 2009 confirming that members of this cluster have the R-L21 mutation that characterises haplogroup R1b1b2a1a2f. Members of this cluster share a common ancestor with the Ui Neill and Dalcassian Royal Families between 1,500 and 4,500 years ago in northwest Ireland, where these haplotypes are most prevalent.
quote:Originally posted by tigerlily_misr: Egypt Boy King Tut’s Lineage Discovered in Half of Europeans
By IBTimes Staff Reporter | August 2, 2011 4:19 AM EDT
"...The male descendants of pharaohs are still around! A new study suggests that most of the European men share the DNA of the most famous Egyptian pharaoh, Tutankhamun, also called the boy King Tut.
According to geneticists at Switzerland-based iGENEA DNA genealogy test center, up to 70 percent of British men and half of all Western European men are related to King Tut.
iGENEA reconstructed the DNA profile of the boy king in 2009 after carrying out extended DNA-tests with the mummy of Tutankamun and other members of his family, including his father Akhenaten and his grandfather Amenhotep III.
The result of the DNA-tests showed that King Tut belonged to haplogroup R1b1a2, which more than 50 percent of all men in Western Europe belong to, iGENEA said in a statement.
The R1b1a2-lineage is believed to have originated about 9,500 years ago in the Black Sea region, researchers said, adding that the haplogroup began to migrate to Europe with the spread of agriculture since 7,000 BC...."
King Tut died from sickle-cell disease, not malaria Just like his ancestors!
King Tutankhamun died from sickle-cell disease, not malaria, say experts. A team from Hamburg's Bernhard Noct Institute for Tropical Medicine (BNI) claim the disease is a far likelier cause of death than the combination of bone disorders and malaria put forward by Egyptian experts earlier this year.
The BNI team argues that theories offered by Egyptian experts, led by antiquities tsar Zahi Hawass, are based on data that can be interpreted otherwise. They say further analysis of the data will confirm or deny their work. Hawass' claim, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association this February, and followed by a swarm of accompanying television shows, claimed King Tut suffered from Kohler's disease, a bone disorder prohibiting blood flow, before succumbing to malaria.
Multiple bone disorders, including one in Tutankhamun's left foot, led to the Kohler's diagnosis, while segments of a malarial parasite were found via DNA testing. Yet the BNI team claims the latter results are incorrect. “Malaria in combination with Köhler's disease causing Tutankhamun's early death seems unlikely to us,” say Prof Christian Meyer and Dr Christian Timmann.
Instead the BNI team feels sickle-cell disease (SCD), a genetic blood disorder, is a more likely reason for the Pharaoh's death aged just 19. The disease occurs in 9 to 22 per cent of people living in the Egyptian oases, and gives a better chance of surviving malaria; the infestation halted by sickled cells.
They say the disease occurs frequently in malarial regions like the River Nile, and that it would account for the bone defects found on his body.
“The genetic predisposition for (SCD) can be found in regions where malaria frequently occurs, including ancient and modern Egypt.” says Meyer. “The disease can only manifest itself when a sickle cell trait is inherited from both parents: it is a so-called 'recessive inheritance'.” A family tree for the Pharaoh suggested by Hawass himself appears to back the BNI team's case.
The relatively old age of Tutankhamun's parents and relatives – up to 50 years – means they could very well have carried sickle-cell traits, and could therefore have been highly resistant to malaria. The high likelihood that King Tut's parents were siblings means he could have inherited the sickle cell trait from both and suffered from SCD.
“Sickle-cell disease is an important differential diagnosis: one that existing DNA material can probably confirm or rule out,” conclude Timmann and Meyer. They suggest that further testing of ancient Egyptian royal mummies should bear their conclusions in mind.
“Sickle-cell disease is an important differential diagnosis: one that existing DNA material can probably confirm or rule out,” conclude Timmann and Meyer. They suggest that further testing of ancient Egyptian royal mummies should bear their conclusions in mind.
King Tut's young demise has long been a source of speculation. As well as malaria, recent decades have seen scholars argue that he was murdered, and that he died from infection caused by a broken leg.
Careful, phylogenetic nomenclature changes every year but the markers delineating haplogroups are not subject to change. The changes in phylogeny that R-M269 has gone through per Wiki: From 2003 to 2005; R1b3. From 2005 to 2008; R1b1c. From 2008 to 2011; R1b1b2
Long story short:
R1b1a2 is now equivalent to R-M269 not R-V88. Refer to hg by marker to never be downlevel.
Sidebar @ all: AFAIK R-M269 doesn't even amount to 1% in any African population, that's less than a penny out of a dollar, quite trivial and totally insignificant.
Why do they change the definitions so often?
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: Premature celebrations...
1) The Ribia profile occurs in LESS THAN 1% of modern Egyptians. Per IGNEA itself: quote-"In Egypt the contingent of this haplogroup is below 1%.."(http://www.igenea.com/en/index.php?c=62). Assorted "HDB" racists like to talk about "continuity" of the ancients into modern times, and here they are hoist on their own petard. If Tut's DNA is "more related to Europeans" and such DNA is of trivial occurrence in today's Egypt, then their precious "Caucasoid Egypt" is blown out of the water, and shown for the trivial chump change that it is.
2) The minor trivia that is R1b1a2 occurs mostly in northern Egypt, but even here assorted "biodiversity" celebrations come up short. Among its strong representatives are peoples of the Siwa Oasis, (Cruciani et al 2010. Y-chromosome of R-V88) people who cluster mostly with Sub-Saharan Africans than Europeans or "Middle Easterners" (COudray et al 2008)
3) Even sOme "biodiversity" types are waffling over the latest revelation. On Dinkines blog, he mocked iGNEA earlier for using too broad categories, now he also is unsure about the new Tut findings noting that the Y-Chromosome of Tut has never been scientifically published and validated, and that credible scientists find reported claims about Tut's DNA to be sloppy science work. See: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20014-royal-rumpus-over-king-tutankhamuns-ancestry.html
IGNAEA continues use of the same shaky methods. Direct sequencing of YTtTut data was not done. They used a proxy method of analysis, filmed by the discovery Channel. QUOTE: "iGENEA was able to reconstruct the Y-DNA profile of Tutankhamun, his father Akhenaten and his grandfather Amenhotep III with the help of a recording of the Discovery Channel."
So much for "Aryan" celebrations re their bogus "Caucasoid" Egypt.
Yes, it is incredible how rapid it took off like wildfire and spread all over the net.
In the meanwhile, "iGENEA was able to reconstruct the Y-DNA profile of Tutankhamun, his father Akhenaten and his grandfather Amenhotep III with the help of a recording of the Discovery Channel."
They should have posted the pictures along with that so called evident study.
Some of the other subjects they circumvent on, at this narcissist website;
Top links » Forum » The warrior gene » Jews » Vikings » Celts » Germanic Tribes » Family Finder
I mean do I need to explain any further? I don't think so...it looks like a major advertisement campaign, no more no less. How do we get people on to our website??
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: As much as you are right about the groups you've mentioned, do you truly believe ancient Africans did not migrate over/ on the continent?
Oromo's are the second largest African group/ tribe of people next to the Fulani. Some Oromo's moved to West-Africas Sahel and vice versa, West-Africans moved to East and the North-East.
Therefore lingusticly, Afroasiatic is the most widespread language base in Africa, North-West, North-East, East, including West African regions.
It would have been known if the Egyptians migrated all over the continent! ive never heard of Oromo moving to West Africa. Hausa yes. Could you enlighten me please?
West africans moved to North east? ok when?
Posts: 558 | From: forum | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
The definitions do not change. Haplogroups are defined by polymorphic markers. When trying to list haplogroups in a "family tree" phylogenetic nomenclature by generations comes into usage and so we get R from whence R1 from which R1b and so on on down the line.
But when a new polymorphism is uncovered the YCC (Y Chromosome Consortium) tries to find a place for it in the tree. Because of the new marker's relationship to known markers, more often than not, a reordering of tree's branches becomes necessary.
Before the YCC each geneticist was inventing their own nomenclature for haplogroups. The YCC actually lessens the confusion by implementing an agreed upon system adopted by nearly all geneticist.
Relationships are seen by using the tree branch designation for markers even though they are very subject to change. But using the polymorphic label prevents confusion as to which haplogroup is in fact under examination, analysis, or discussion because the mutation identifying a haplogroup will not alter because of new found different mutations located in a different position along the length of a chromosome in relation to mutations whose chromosome position is already known.
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: @ Zar
Careful, phylogenetic nomenclature changes every year but the markers delineating haplogroups are not subject to change. The changes in phylogeny that R-M269 has gone through per Wiki: From 2003 to 2005; R1b3. From 2005 to 2008; R1b1c. From 2008 to 2011; R1b1b2
Long story short:
R1b1a2 is now equivalent to R-M269 not R-V88. Refer to hg by marker to never be downlevel.
Sidebar @ all: AFAIK R-M269 doesn't even amount to 1% in any African population, that's less than a penny out of a dollar, quite trivial and totally insignificant.
Why do they change the definitions so often?
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: As much as you are right about the groups you've mentioned, do you truly believe ancient Africans did not migrate over/ on the continent?
Oromo's are the second largest African group/ tribe of people next to the Fulani. Some Oromo's moved to West-Africas Sahel and vice versa, West-Africans moved to East and the North-East.
Therefore lingusticly, Afroasiatic is the most widespread language base in Africa, North-West, North-East, East, including West African regions.
It would have been known if the Egyptians migrated all over the continent! ive never heard of Oromo moving to West Africa. Hausa yes. Could you enlighten me please?
West africans moved to North east? ok when?
So you do not know that West Africans moved into Northeast Africa during ancient, as even as in recent times, during the Islamic expansion.
Pottery of Egyptian origin has been found in places like Zimbabwe and in West African regions.
Of course you have never heard of Oromo migrations, what else is new? But the Hausa yes??
.....do you know that there are ancient civilizations beneath the dessert sand. Could this even be possible....?
Plus the Siwa Berbers are to my knowledge the only Northafrican group to cluster with V-88 up to 24% (or something). How come?
One of the primary reasons why African groups mostly remain in a certain haplogroup is due to tribalization. "They tend to stick to their own group." And at times region.
Ps. You did not respond to the Afroasiatic linguistic phylum argument. Which Hausa is part of as well.
Yet, the hypothetical lie is pushed that European descent from ancient Africans/ Egyptians. While europeans were wandering in European forests and caves.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: The definitions do not change. Haplogroups are defined by polymorphic markers. When trying to list haplogroups in a "family tree" phylogenetic nomenclature by generations comes into usage and so we get R from whence R1 from which R1b and so on on down the line.
But when a new polymorphism is uncovered the YCC (Y Chromosome Consortium) tries to find a place for it in the tree. Because of the new marker's relationship to known markers, more often than not, a reordering of tree's branches becomes necessary.
Before the YCC each geneticist was inventing their own nomenclature for haplogroups. The YCC actually lessens the confusion by implementing an agreed upon system adopted by nearly all geneticist.
Relationships are seen by using the tree branch designation for markers even though they are very subject to change. But using the polymorphic label prevents confusion as to which haplogroup is in fact under examination, analysis, or discussion because the mutation identifying a haplogroup will not alter because of new found different mutations located in a different position along the length of a chromosome in relation to mutations whose chromosome position is already known.
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: @ Zar
Careful, phylogenetic nomenclature changes every year but the markers delineating haplogroups are not subject to change. The changes in phylogeny that R-M269 has gone through per Wiki: From 2003 to 2005; R1b3. From 2005 to 2008; R1b1c. From 2008 to 2011; R1b1b2
Long story short:
R1b1a2 is now equivalent to R-M269 not R-V88. Refer to hg by marker to never be downlevel.
Sidebar @ all: AFAIK R-M269 doesn't even amount to 1% in any African population, that's less than a penny out of a dollar, quite trivial and totally insignificant.
Why do they change the definitions so often?
Ok, thanks. At least it is better, having a centralized system.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is what I have been saying all along, Even Modern Day Egyptians have signifigant African DNA also signifigant Arab DNA. Yet we are supposed to believe the Ancient Egyptians were Europeans or Caucasians when even Modern Day Egyptians have signifigant amount of African genes, The Truth is WE are right, The A. Egyptians were Tropical Africans and their decendents are the Modern Egyptians and the best representation of that is found in Upper Egypt and Northern Sudan.
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: Premature celebrations...
1) The Ribia profile occurs in LESS THAN 1% of modern Egyptians. Per IGNEA itself: quote-"In Egypt the contingent of this haplogroup is below 1%.."(http://www.igenea.com/en/index.php?c=62). Assorted "HDB" racists like to talk about "continuity" of the ancients into modern times, and here they are hoist on their own petard. If Tut's DNA is "more related to Europeans" and such DNA is of trivial occurrence in today's Egypt, then their precious "Caucasoid Egypt" is blown out of the water, and shown for the trivial chump change that it is.
2) The minor trivia that is R1b1a2 occurs mostly in northern Egypt, but even here assorted "biodiversity" celebrations come up short. Among its strong representatives are peoples of the Siwa Oasis, (Cruciani et al 2010. Y-chromosome of R-V88) people who cluster mostly with Sub-Saharan Africans than Europeans or "Middle Easterners" (COudray et al 2008)
3) Even sOme "biodiversity" types are waffling over the latest revelation. On Dinkines blog, he mocked iGNEA earlier for using too broad categories, now he also is unsure about the new Tut findings noting that the Y-Chromosome of Tut has never been scientifically published and validated, and that credible scientists find reported claims about Tut's DNA to be sloppy science work. See: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20014-royal-rumpus-over-king-tutankhamuns-ancestry.html
IGNAEA continues use of the same shaky methods. Direct sequencing of YTtTut data was not done. They used a proxy method of analysis, filmed by the discovery Channel. QUOTE: "iGENEA was able to reconstruct the Y-DNA profile of Tutankhamun, his father Akhenaten and his grandfather Amenhotep III with the help of a recording of the Discovery Channel."
So much for "Aryan" celebrations re their bogus "Caucasoid" Egypt.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: So you do not know that West Africans moved into Northeast Africa during ancient, as even as in recent times, during the Islamic expansion.
Pottery of Egyptian origin has been found in places like Zimbabwe and in West African regions.
Of course you have never heard of Oromo migrations, what else is new? But the Hausa yes??
.....do you know that there are ancient civilizations beneath the dessert sand. Could this even be possible....?
Plus the Siwa Berbers are to my knowledge the only Northafrican group to cluster with V-88 up to 24% (or something). How come?
One of the primary reasons why African groups mostly remain in a certain haplogroup is due to tribalization. "They tend to stick to their own group." And at times region.
Ps. You did not respond to the Afroasiatic linguistic phylum argument. Which Hausa is part of as well.
Yet, the hypothetical lie is pushed that European descent from ancient Africans/ Egyptians. While europeans were wandering in European forests and caves.
Human Y chromosome haplogroup R-V88: a paternal genetic record of early mid Holocene trans-Saharan connections and the spread of Chadic languages Fulvio Cruciani et al. Abstract Although human Y chromosomes belonging to haplogroup R1b are quite rare in Africa, being found mainly in Asia and Europe, a group of chromosomes within the paragroup R-P25* are found concentrated in the central-western part of the African continent, where they can be detected at frequencies as high as 95%. Phylogenetic evidence and coalescence time estimates suggest that R-P25* chromosomes (or their phylogenetic ancestor) may have been carried to Africa by an Asia-to-Africa back migration in prehistoric times. Here, we describe six new mutations that define the relationships among the African R-P25* Y chromosomes and between these African chromosomes and earlier reported R-P25 Eurasian sub-lineages. The incorporation of these new mutations into a phylogeny of the R1b haplogroup led to the identification of a new clade (R1b1a or R-V88) encompassing all the African R-P25* and about half of the few European/west Asian R-P25* chromosomes. A worldwide phylogeographic analysis of the R1b haplogroup provided strong support to the Asia-to-Africa back-migration hypothesis. The analysis of the distribution of the R-V88 haplogroup in >1800 males from 69 African populations revealed a striking genetic contiguity between the Chadic-speaking peoples from the central Sahel and several other Afroasiatic-speaking groups from North Africa. The R-V88 coalescence time was estimated at 9200–5600 kya, in the early mid Holocene. We suggest that R-V88 is a paternal genetic record of the proposed mid-Holocene migration of proto-Chadic Afroasiatic speakers through the Central Sahara into the Lake Chad Basin, and geomorphological evidence is consistent with this view.
Yeah, explain me the Oromo migration to west africa please. im all yours
"So you do not know that West Africans moved into Northeast Africa during ancient, as even as in recent times, during the Islamic expansion."
Not before, not after.
Posts: 558 | From: forum | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: So you do not know that West Africans moved into Northeast Africa during ancient, as even as in recent times, during the Islamic expansion.
Pottery of Egyptian origin has been found in places like Zimbabwe and in West African regions.
Of course you have never heard of Oromo migrations, what else is new? But the Hausa yes??
.....do you know that there are ancient civilizations beneath the dessert sand. Could this even be possible....?
Plus the Siwa Berbers are to my knowledge the only Northafrican group to cluster with V-88 up to 24% (or something). How come?
One of the primary reasons why African groups mostly remain in a certain haplogroup is due to tribalization. "They tend to stick to their own group." And at times region.
Ps. You did not respond to the Afroasiatic linguistic phylum argument. Which Hausa is part of as well.
Yet, the hypothetical lie is pushed that European descent from ancient Africans/ Egyptians. While europeans were wandering in European forests and caves.
Human Y chromosome haplogroup R-V88: a paternal genetic record of early mid Holocene trans-Saharan connections and the spread of Chadic languages Fulvio Cruciani et al. Abstract Although human Y chromosomes belonging to haplogroup R1b are quite rare in Africa, being found mainly in Asia and Europe, a group of chromosomes within the paragroup R-P25* are found concentrated in the central-western part of the African continent, where they can be detected at frequencies as high as 95%. Phylogenetic evidence and coalescence time estimates suggest that R-P25* chromosomes (or their phylogenetic ancestor) may have been carried to Africa by an Asia-to-Africa back migration in prehistoric times. Here, we describe six new mutations that define the relationships among the African R-P25* Y chromosomes and between these African chromosomes and earlier reported R-P25 Eurasian sub-lineages. The incorporation of these new mutations into a phylogeny of the R1b haplogroup led to the identification of a new clade (R1b1a or R-V88) encompassing all the African R-P25* and about half of the few European/west Asian R-P25* chromosomes. A worldwide phylogeographic analysis of the R1b haplogroup provided strong support to the Asia-to-Africa back-migration hypothesis. The analysis of the distribution of the R-V88 haplogroup in >1800 males from 69 African populations revealed a striking genetic contiguity between the Chadic-speaking peoples from the central Sahel and several other Afroasiatic-speaking groups from North Africa. The R-V88 coalescence time was estimated at 9200–5600 kya, in the early mid Holocene. We suggest that R-V88 is a paternal genetic record of the proposed mid-Holocene migration of proto-Chadic Afroasiatic speakers through the Central Sahara into the Lake Chad Basin, and geomorphological evidence is consistent with this view.
Yeah, explain me the Oromo migration to west africa please. im all yours
"So you do not know that West Africans moved into Northeast Africa during ancient, as even as in recent times, during the Islamic expansion."
Not before, not after.
Where did I say that Oromo are V88?
I wrote, the Siwa are V88 up to 24%. Did I not...hmmm?
You roll your eyes until you get dizzy. The Sahara/ Sahel always has been a migration route. Whether whites want to acknowledge this or not isn't relevant.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
! 
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Nothing.
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic