quote:Originally posted by akoben08: ^ His point is that both contemporary East Africans and Euros show admixture white nerd. Cavelli Sforza has already been exposed by Keita et al. These contemporary genetic studies say nothing for ancient east African especially Egyptian racial make up, which I know is where you want to take this argument. You are showing same desperation as Khazar pseudo scientists in trying to "prove" they are from Levantine Jewry, they managed to fool Ausarianstein though. lol But you are more pathetic, it's wide stretch, and so is your agenda.
How in the Hell can you be sure that they haven't always been mixed and thank you. Someone finally having the ballz to admit that this group has signifigant admixture.
Its well known that some Ethiopian ethnicities are mixed in terms of being part Southern Arabian. If you are trying to extend that to all East African in general then I think you need to do more research. It is not even appropriate to save that Ethiopians are mixed since you need to specify which groups you are referring to, let alone give that diescription as a generalization of East Africans.
Show me a study showing that Somalians are 50/50!
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Someone finally having the ballz to admit that this group has signifigant admixture.
Never said "significant admixture", those are Cavelli Sforza's exaggerations, and another sign of desperation on your part.
Posts: 4165 | From: jamaica | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
White Nord
A banned big lipped primate
Member # 14093
quote:Originally posted by akoben08: ^ His point is that both contemporary East Africans and Euros show admixture white nerd. Cavelli Sforza has already been exposed by Keita et al. These contemporary genetic studies say nothing for ancient east African especially Egyptian racial make up, which I know is where you want to take this argument. You are showing same desperation as Khazar pseudo scientists in trying to "prove" they are from Levantine Jewry, they managed to fool Ausarianstein though. lol But you are more pathetic, it's wide stretch, and so is your agenda.
How in the Hell can you be sure that they haven't always been mixed and thank you. Someone finally having the ballz to admit that this group has signifigant admixture.
Its well known that some Ethiopian ethnicities are mixed in terms of being part Southern Arabian. If you are trying to extend that to all East African in general then I think you need to do more research. It is not even appropriate to save that Ethiopians are mixed since you need to specify which groups you are referring to, let alone give that diescription as a generalization of East Africans.
Show me a study showing that Somalians are 50/50!
The Somali male population has approximately 15% Y chromosomes from Eurasia and approximately 5% from sub-Saharan Africa.
Approximately 10 miles separate the Horn of Africa from the Arabian Peninsula at Bab-el-Mandeb (the Gate of Tears). Both historic and archaeological evidence indicate tight cultural connections, over millennia, between these two regions. High-resolution phylogenetic analysis of 270 Ethiopian and 115 Yemeni mitochondrial DNAs was performed in a worldwide context, to explore gene flow across the Red and Arabian Seas. Nine distinct subclades, including three newly defined ones, were found to characterize entirely the variation of Ethiopian and Yemeni L3 lineages. Both Ethiopians and Yemenis contain an almost-equal proportion of Eurasian-specific M and N and African-specific lineages and therefore cluster together in a multidimensional scaling plot between Near Eastern and sub-Saharan African populations. Phylogeographic identification of potential founder haplotypes revealed that approximately one-half of haplogroup L0L5 lineages in Yemenis have close or matching counterparts in southeastern Africans, compared with a minor share in Ethiopians. Newly defined clade L6, the most frequent haplogroup in Yemenis, showed no close matches among 3,000 African samples. These results highlight the complexity of Ethiopian and Yemeni genetic heritage and are consistent with the introduction of maternal lineages into the South Arabian gene pool from different source populations of East Africa. A high proportion of Ethiopian lineages, significantly more abundant in the northeast of that country, trace their western Eurasian origin in haplogroup N through assorted gene flow at different times and involving different source populations.
The study its self indicates that Ethiopians sampled, share 52.2% maternal lineages in common with "Sub-Saharan" Africa, with Yemenis sharing 45% of the same lineages.. In other words, "half and half".
THEY ARE MIXED!
Posts: 219 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by akoben08: ^ His point is that both contemporary East Africans and Euros show admixture white nerd. Cavelli Sforza has already been exposed by Keita et al. These contemporary genetic studies say nothing for ancient east African especially Egyptian racial make up, which I know is where you want to take this argument. You are showing same desperation as Khazar pseudo scientists in trying to "prove" they are from Levantine Jewry, they managed to fool Ausarianstein though. lol But you are more pathetic, it's wide stretch, and so is your agenda.
How in the Hell can you be sure that they haven't always been mixed and thank you. Someone finally having the ballz to admit that this group has signifigant admixture.
Its well known that some Ethiopian ethnicities are mixed in terms of being part Southern Arabian. If you are trying to extend that to all East African in general then I think you need to do more research. It is not even appropriate to save that Ethiopians are mixed since you need to specify which groups you are referring to, let alone give that diescription as a generalization of East Africans.
Show me a study showing that Somalians are 50/50!
The Somali male population has approximately 15% Y chromosomes from Eurasia and approximately 5% from sub-Saharan Africa.
Approximately 10 miles separate the Horn of Africa from the Arabian Peninsula at Bab-el-Mandeb (the Gate of Tears). Both historic and archaeological evidence indicate tight cultural connections, over millennia, between these two regions. High-resolution phylogenetic analysis of 270 Ethiopian and 115 Yemeni mitochondrial DNAs was performed in a worldwide context, to explore gene flow across the Red and Arabian Seas. Nine distinct subclades, including three newly defined ones, were found to characterize entirely the variation of Ethiopian and Yemeni L3 lineages. Both Ethiopians and Yemenis contain an almost-equal proportion of Eurasian-specific M and N and African-specific lineages and therefore cluster together in a multidimensional scaling plot between Near Eastern and sub-Saharan African populations. Phylogeographic identification of potential founder haplotypes revealed that approximately one-half of haplogroup L0L5 lineages in Yemenis have close or matching counterparts in southeastern Africans, compared with a minor share in Ethiopians. Newly defined clade L6, the most frequent haplogroup in Yemenis, showed no close matches among 3,000 African samples. These results highlight the complexity of Ethiopian and Yemeni genetic heritage and are consistent with the introduction of maternal lineages into the South Arabian gene pool from different source populations of East Africa. A high proportion of Ethiopian lineages, significantly more abundant in the northeast of that country, trace their western Eurasian origin in haplogroup N through assorted gene flow at different times and involving different source populations.
The study its self indicates that Ethiopians sampled, share 52.2% maternal lineages in common with "Sub-Saharan" Africa, with Yemenis sharing 45% of the same lineages.. In other words, "half and half".
THEY ARE MIXED!
White Nordic.. First of all, that Somali study says no such thing about a 50/50 admixture, they have less non-African ancestry than AAs as a matter of fact according to that abstract, and the Ethiopian study is misleading. It it most notedly, not autosomal, it's maternal and is haste in its conclusions since it attributes M1 to Eurasian ancestry when it is more generally seen as an East African variant. In addition, the sample size is selective and doesn't represent the range of ethnicities in Ethiopia.
-------------------- mr.writer.asa@gmail.com Posts: 4021 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
White Nord
A banned big lipped primate
Member # 14093
quote:Originally posted by akoben08: ^ His point is that both contemporary East Africans and Euros show admixture white nerd. Cavelli Sforza has already been exposed by Keita et al. These contemporary genetic studies say nothing for ancient east African especially Egyptian racial make up, which I know is where you want to take this argument. You are showing same desperation as Khazar pseudo scientists in trying to "prove" they are from Levantine Jewry, they managed to fool Ausarianstein though. lol But you are more pathetic, it's wide stretch, and so is your agenda.
How in the Hell can you be sure that they haven't always been mixed and thank you. Someone finally having the ballz to admit that this group has signifigant admixture.
Its well known that some Ethiopian ethnicities are mixed in terms of being part Southern Arabian. If you are trying to extend that to all East African in general then I think you need to do more research. It is not even appropriate to save that Ethiopians are mixed since you need to specify which groups you are referring to, let alone give that diescription as a generalization of East Africans.
Show me a study showing that Somalians are 50/50!
The Somali male population has approximately 15% Y chromosomes from Eurasia and approximately 5% from sub-Saharan Africa.
Approximately 10 miles separate the Horn of Africa from the Arabian Peninsula at Bab-el-Mandeb (the Gate of Tears). Both historic and archaeological evidence indicate tight cultural connections, over millennia, between these two regions. High-resolution phylogenetic analysis of 270 Ethiopian and 115 Yemeni mitochondrial DNAs was performed in a worldwide context, to explore gene flow across the Red and Arabian Seas. Nine distinct subclades, including three newly defined ones, were found to characterize entirely the variation of Ethiopian and Yemeni L3 lineages. Both Ethiopians and Yemenis contain an almost-equal proportion of Eurasian-specific M and N and African-specific lineages and therefore cluster together in a multidimensional scaling plot between Near Eastern and sub-Saharan African populations. Phylogeographic identification of potential founder haplotypes revealed that approximately one-half of haplogroup L0L5 lineages in Yemenis have close or matching counterparts in southeastern Africans, compared with a minor share in Ethiopians. Newly defined clade L6, the most frequent haplogroup in Yemenis, showed no close matches among 3,000 African samples. These results highlight the complexity of Ethiopian and Yemeni genetic heritage and are consistent with the introduction of maternal lineages into the South Arabian gene pool from different source populations of East Africa. A high proportion of Ethiopian lineages, significantly more abundant in the northeast of that country, trace their western Eurasian origin in haplogroup N through assorted gene flow at different times and involving different source populations.
The study its self indicates that Ethiopians sampled, share 52.2% maternal lineages in common with "Sub-Saharan" Africa, with Yemenis sharing 45% of the same lineages.. In other words, "half and half".
THEY ARE MIXED!
White Nordic.. First of all, that Somali study says no such thing about a 50/50 admixture, they have less non-African ancestry than AAs as a matter of fact according to that abstract, and the Ethiopian study is misleading. It it most notedly, not autosomal, it's maternal and is haste in its conclusions since it attributes M1 to Eurasian ancestry when it is more generally seen as an East African variant. In addition, the sample size is selective and doesn't represent the range of ethnicities in Ethiopia.
A Ba Wa Wa so I guess this is nothing more than hogwash because it goes against your fantasy!
Posts: 219 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
Origin of Ethiopian genetic heterogeneity posted on Saturday, March 05, 2005 | 5 comments | No trackbacks In agreement with previous research, a new study observes the intermediate position of Ethiopians between Sub-Saharan Africans (Negroids) and Western Eurasians (Caucasoids); genetic heterogeneity of Ethiopians is found to be the result of admixture:
However, the reduction in Tn diversity does suggest that a population bottleneck occurred in Ethiopia, associated with a major out of Africa expansion(s), which parallels the conclusion made by Tishkoff et al. (1996) from analysis of the CD4 locus. Certainly our data are not incompatible with the argument from Tishkoff et al. (1996) that an element of the contemporary Ethiopian population may be descendants of the ancestral population that spawned the migration out of Africa. We also argue, however, that in addition to this early bottleneck event, later periods of admixture have played a major role in shaping the gene pool of Ethiopia, and its populations display both Eurasian and Sub-Saharan genetic influences.
White Nord, it seems to me that while you may be aware of what you're doing, you are not aware of what you're actually discussing. For instance, where does the underlying gist of the cited piece go back to?Remember this point [see above]:
Ethiopia has been found to be 'intermediate', primarily because non-African gene pools are a subset of an East African population, and to a lesser extent, secondary to *bi-directional* gene flow between the African Horn and its neighbours. In other words, it is a region genetically composite of deep-rooted lineages that are rare outside of the African continent and more downstream mutations that are common in both Africa and elsewhere - hence, the intermediate location.
White Nord, what do you understand by this point. Does it explain the observation made in the cited piece? If not, then please explain!
quote:White Nord writes:
These results confirms what I have stated on several occasions in the past, about the three major elements in the East African population, e.g.,:
Thus, it appears that a large fraction of present-day East African mitochondrial ancestry is derived from different populations than the ones that spawned non-Africans. This element is probably responsible for the introduction of the Negroid type in the region, which now forms a major element in the population, together with the pre-Negroid East Africans and more recent Caucasoid arrivals from across the Red Sea.
As I said, you may be aware of what you're doing [like say, willful evasion], but you aren't aware of what you're discussing. For instance, you were aware of the fact that you dodged this point:
For one, "caucasoid" is scientifically bankrupt. What makes a gene "caucasoid", and what are they?
...but you aren't aware of what "caucasoid" or "negroid" gene actually is and what it entails [i.e. what specifically makes it "negroid" or "caucasoid"], as testified by the fact that you dodged the obligation to explain them.
Also, lay out the time frame of the eminence of "pre-negroid" anatomically modern humans in Africa, which seems to suggest that this a.m.h entity precedes the so-called "negroid" entity; also elaborate on the biological and environmental details of this "pre-negroid" entity. All this seems to be a flashback to regurgitated stormfront-like pseudo-science put forth by a long gone unknowledgeable dienekes disciple.
quote:White Nord posts:
Annals of Human Genetics (OnlineEarly)
Ethiopia: between Sub-Saharan Africa and Western Eurasia
A. Lovell et al.
Summary
Ethiopia is central to population genetic studies investigating the out of Africa expansion of modern humans, as shown by Y chromosome and mtDNA studies. To address the level of genetic differentiation within Ethiopia, and its relationship to Sub-Saharan Africa and Eurasia, we studied an 8kb segment of the X-chromosome from 72 chromosomes from the Amhara, Oromo and Ethiopian Jews, and compared these results with 804 chromosomes from Middle Eastern, African, Asian and European populations, and 22 newly typed Saharawi. Within Ethiopia the two largest ethnic groups, the Amhara and Oromo, were not found to be statistically distinct, based on an exact test of haplotype frequencies. The Ethiopian Jews appear as an admixed population, possibly of Jewish origin, though the data remain equivocal. There is evidence of a close relationship between Ethiopian and Yemenite Jews, likely a result of indirect gene flow. Within an African and Eurasian context, the distribution of alleles of a variable Tn repeat, and the spread of haplotypes containing Africa-specific alleles, provide evidence of a genetic continuity from Sub-Saharan Africa to the Near East, and furthermore suggest that a bottleneck occurred in Ethiopia associated with an out of Africa expansion. Ethiopian genetic heterogeneity, as evidenced by principal component analysis of haplotype frequencies, most likely resulted from periods of subsequent admixture. While these results are from the analysis of one locus, we feel that in association with data from other marker systems they add a complementary perspective on the history of Ethiopia
Goes back to:
Ethiopia has been found to be 'intermediate', primarily because non-African gene pools are a subset of an East African population, and to a lesser extent, secondary to *bi-directional* gene flow between the African Horn and its neighbours. In other words, it is a region genetically composite of deep-rooted lineages that are rare outside of the African continent and more downstream mutations that are common in both Africa and elsewhere - hence, the intermediate location.
^See above about what you need to do about this point.
quote:White Nord posts:
Dipartimento di Genetica e Microbiologia, "A. Buzzati Traverso," Universita di Pavia, Pavia, Italy.
Seventy-seven Ethiopians were investigated for mtDNA and Y chromosome-specific variations, in order to (1) define the different maternal and paternal components of the Ethiopian gene pool, (2) infer the origins of these maternal and paternal lineages and estimate their relative contributions, and (3) obtain information about ancient populations living in Ethiopia. The mtDNA was studied for the RFLPs relative to the six classical enzymes (HpaI, BamHI, HaeII, MspI, AvaII, and HincII) that identify the African haplogroup L and the Caucasoid haplogroups I and T. The sample was also examined at restriction sites that define the other Caucasoid haplogroups (H, U, V, W, X, J, and K) and for the simultaneous presence of the DdeI10394 and AluI10397 sites, which defines the Asian haplogroup M. Four polymorphic systems were examined on the Y chromosome: the TaqI/12f2 and the 49a,f RFLPs, the Y Alu polymorphic element (DYS287), and the sY81-A/G (DYS271) polymorphism. For comparison, the last two Y polymorphisms were also examined in 87 Senegalese previously classified for the two TaqI RFLPs. Results from these markers led to the hypothesis that the Ethiopian population (1) experienced Caucasoid gene flow mainly through males, (2) contains African components ascribable to Bantu migrations and to an in situ differentiation process from an ancestral African gene pool, and (3) exhibits some Y-chromosome affinities with the Tsumkwe San (a very ancient African group). Our finding of a high (20%) frequency of the "Asian" DdeI10394AluI10397 (++) mtDNA haplotype in Ethiopia is discussed in terms of the "out of Africa" model.
For one, "caucasoid" is scientifically bankrupt. What makes a gene "caucasoid", and what are they?
There is nothing "Asian" about either 10394 DdeI or 10397 Alu restriction enzyme identified sites:
Recap,
Am. J. Hum. Genet., 66:1362-1383, 2000
mtDNA Variation in the South African Kung and Khwe and Their Genetic Relationships to Other African Populations
"The Asian mtDNA phylogeny is subdivided into two macrohaplogroups, one of which is M. M is delineated by a DdeI site at np 10394 and an AluI site of np 10397. The only African mtDNA [i.e. aside from Hg M1] found to have both of these sites is the Senegalese haplotype AF24. This haplotype branches off African subhaplogroup L3a (figs.2 and3), suggesting that haplogroup M mtDNAs might have been derived from this African mtDNA lineage..."
Which was at any rate, addressed in my M1 analytical response to Gonzalez et al.; it seems to me that you either didn't bother to read that analysis at all, as indicated by this citation of Passarino's out-of-date characterizations, and/or you didn't understand one bit of it.
As noted, there's nothing "Asian" about 10394 DdeI site:
A less frequent group of haplotypes lacks the African-specific 3592 HpaI marker [10394DdeI(+)/ 10397AluI(-)/3592HpaI(-)] (Chen et al. 1995, 2000) and has been designated as haplogroup L3 (Watson et al. 1997). - Clemencia Rodas et al., Mitochondrial DNA studies show asymmetrical Amerindian admixture in Afro-Colombian and Mestizo populations, 2003.
As for RFLPs? Well, I noted before:
I see the method used herein, almost akin to using RFLP in Y chromosomes and microsatellite motifs, without having details on binary markers that could clearly define the monophyletic units themselves, thereby pooling otherwise different lineages based on absence or presence of certain restriction sites. We've seen this in the case of Y chromosomes, wherein E-M78, E-M81 and some other yet-to-be identified lineage were pooled together based on certain RFLP sequences, but when binary markers were tested, these related but distinct lineages came to the fore. Link
DYS287 is nothing more than reference to YAP Alu insertion, which is common to all PN2 clades, which are mainly present in Africa, with the exception of haplogroup D in south Asia. DYS271 which is generally associated with E3a [PN2+, YAP+] chromosomes, is according to most studies undertaken thus far, relatively low to rare in Ethiopian samples. Passarino misleadingly characterizes the site as "ascribable to Bantu migrations"; as far as I know, no Bantu-speaking population is a part of the at least 80 or so distinct ethnic natives of Ethiopia, unless you are prepared to identify them...which brings us to this point:
Ethiopia is a big country, with at least some 80 different ethnic groups. In fact, it is one of the most diverse nations on mainland Africa. The bulk of these were not tested by Passarino; so, how you can reduce their gene pool to Passarino et al.'s findings, is beyond logic.
Where are the gene pools of the at least 80 or so distinct ethnic groups of Ethiopia, such that you'd generalize the entire Ethiopian gene pool by relatively very limited samplings undertaken in one or a few genealogical research projects?
Your lack of engagement to the points raised, again tells me that, while you may be aware of what you're doing in terms of evading instructive points raised and hence, blindly regurgitating questionable and/or redundant points, you don't actually understand the material depth of what you're posting!
Posts: 233 | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote: Certainly our data are not incompatible with the argument from Tishkoff et al. (1996) that an element of the contemporary Ethiopian population may be descendants of the ancestral population that spawned the migration out of Africa.
^ This is correct.
The rest is just trollbait noisemaking from Dienekes and other pseudos, which is why you're not creating the desired fanfare, white nerd.
Let us know when you manage to cough up and answer.....
quote: The good news for you however is that there are studies showing that Europeans are a mixture of Africans, Asians and indigenenes, such that they show as genetically intermediate between Africa and Asia:
Europeans show as a mixture of 1/3 African, and 2/3 Asian - European Geneticists, Cavelli Sforza.
[
Please stop showing that damn diagram I'm not talking about Europeans I'm talking about East Africans.
Actually, it does you good to talk about that diagram, because it shows that Europeans are generally more intermediate in the scheme of a global comparison of genetic distances.
quote:White Nord writes:
My God you people act like your scared of the truth that these peoples are indeed a mixture of black and White (or near Easterners). How many damn studies do I need to post to confirm this fact. One after another simply states that these people are a mixture stop lying to yourselfs and accept the studies for what they prove!
In fact, the issue at hand is your selective reading and not wanting to hear the truth, as was already made known here:
Ethiopia has been found to be 'intermediate', primarily because non-African gene pools are a subset of an East African population, and to a lesser extent, secondary to *bi-directional* gene flow between the African Horn and its neighbours. In other words, it is a region genetically composite of deep-rooted lineages that are rare outside of the African continent and more downstream mutations that are common in both Africa and elsewhere - hence, the intermediate location.
^There you have it: you were told the truth; you just chose not to listen to it.
Posts: 233 | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sadly people like White Nord could care less about the truth.
They have more invested in there ideologie. The truth *SHOULD* set you free.
As for that Somali study I have seen that study posted on hear countless times. And people seem to forget the part where Somalis are over 85% African and just concentrate on the Eurasian part of it.
The only good that comes out of new posters repeating old redundant studies is that they get refuted and information once forgotten gets a new ray of light. The truth will never vanish no matter how much old studies get piled up in front of it.
I'm still waiting on a study that takes all of Ethiopia in consideration instead of just useing the Amharas and Tigryna people as a sample of All ethiopians. Something tells me that the only way a country wide study on Ethiopia is coming is if Africans take more of an interest in this field of study.
Peace
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
White Nord and his ilk are simply trying to compensate for what has been observed in Greek and other south European populations, and the history of these groups being not deemed "pure Whites" in certain places by white supremacists...not understanding that the genetics behind "Ethiopian intermediacy" is not one and same as say, "Greek intermediacy". Context makes a big difference. So, instead of taking their frustrations out on white supremacists, they attempt to elicit reaction from Africanists on the idea of 'racial purity', which for the most part, has never been an issue for Africans. "Tainting of pure blood" has always been the mental baggage and problem of white supremacists.
Posts: 233 | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Yes. And that even that level of African "mixture" is a misnomer, because the *bulk* of the genesof which Sforza's analyzed markers are but just a miniscule subsetthat make Europeans human beings in the first place, were inherited from Africans.
quote:Originally posted by akoben08: ^ tell you what, hows about giving me a lap dance in those pink panties of yours while the theme song for south park plays in the background..."friendly faces everywhere!!!" lol
you stupid negro
While I odn't agree with everything M says, South Park's cool, bro, you need to chill out~
quote:Originally posted by Wolofi: there is no need to come to your OWN conclusion just to fit what you want to believe.
Of course not.
So, there's no need to come to the conclusion that M1 originated anywhere outside of Africa.
Be consistant.
Why ALL of the studies say that it does?
Posts: 343 | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
The level of pitifulness of this forum never ceases to amaze.
Now this chimu (White Nord) is trying to lay some bullshit about Ethiopians being different.
LOL, LOL, LOL.
Is that why it is hard to tell the difference between Ethiopians (like the rest of Africans) and African Americans?
I'll post the evidence although I prefer not to because most people that are into race divisions are loons and I don't want to disrupt those sites because that is not what they are for.
They are for their ethnic groups not for a bunch of loons sitting around on their dead asses having delusional race fantasies.
Posts: 3085 | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by argyle104: I'll post the evidence although I prefer not to because most people that are into race divisions are loons and I don't want to disrupt those sites because that is not what they are for.
Well if someone on this forum would finally post evidence that they are Pure unmixed Africans rather than insult my intelligence or claim it's been proven 10000000 times maybe I might be content until then these so called "rebuttals" are pointless and don't address the issue at hand. Give me a study that shows that these peoples are Pure Africans, if you can't produce one then don't even respond to this post just sit there dumbfounded. Quite beating around the bush put up or shut up.
Posts: 219 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
White Nord, I will concur with you, I don't think people from the Horn of Africa are pure based on genetics, but Europeans and West Asians are the most mixed people genetically on the face of the earth...what's your point...are you trying to say that Europeans are purer than Horn of Africa people...I mean you must be joking.... Genetics just show how the Nazis were the most stupid people on earth...White Nord By the way we were all Black not more than 20,000 years ago, leucoderms are quite recent on the face of the earth...White Nord...just tell your Dad and Mom that they have black ancestors and leucoderm skin is just a recent adaptation...
Posts: 461 | From: Kilimanjaro | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
What is pure and what does that have to do with the point that the MAJORITY of Ethiopians are BLACK AFRICANS. You have given NO EVIDENCE that they are not. SOME Ethiopians have European, Arab, Indian and other ancestry. SO WHAT? Some Europeans have Arab, African, Asian and Indian ancestry. So?
If you want to know what Ethiopians look like, then go to Ethiopia.
quote:Originally posted by White Nord: post evidence that they are Pure unmixed Africans rather than insult my intelligence Give me a study that shows that these peoples are Pure Africans,
Noone has to insult your intelligence - you have none. Nobody said anything about "pure" Africans. This is just your final act of desperation to cover for your ignorance of Ethiopian genetics.
Posts: 4165 | From: jamaica | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Doug, It's very difficult to generalize, Northern Ethiopians have more Yemeni ancestry compare to Southern Ethiopians, Northern Somalis have more Yemeni ancestry than Southern Somali...but they are all the same people, same culture...so it's useless to show dark people and try to make a distinction...For most of the people from the Horn, even in Sudan, skin complexion is futile...because people are so mixed that it's impossible to categorize people...I have some friends from Northern Somalia who traveled in the Southern part of the country and were surprised how people were so dark, whereas people from Southern Somalis dismiss people from Northern Somalis as mixed with Yemeni because they are too light from a Southern Somalia standard...even within Somalia there is a lot of confusion....
Posts: 461 | From: Kilimanjaro | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
Well if someone on this forum would finally post evidence that they are Pure
"Racial purity" was your bankrupt dead-ender. Hence, you prove it.
quote:White Nord complains:
rather than insult my intelligence
You had beaten us to it.
quote:White Nord complains:
maybe I might be content until then these so called "rebuttals" are pointless
Because a) you don't understand the ones already given, and b)you have no logical scientific comeback to them. Extreme couch-potato laziness is no substitute for scholarship.
Ps - And no, you aren't expected to be made "content"; you are expected to work your butt off in supporting your propagations and addressing the above mentioned.
quote: White Nord writes:
Quite beating around the bush put up or shut up.
^Good advice; about time you heed to it.
Posts: 233 | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Habari: Doug, It's very difficult to generalize, Northern Ethiopians have more Yemeni ancestry compare to Southern Ethiopians, Northern Somalis have more Yemeni ancestry than Southern Somali...but they are all the same people, same culture...so it's useless to show dark people and try to make a distinction...For most of the people from the Horn, even in Sudan, skin complexion is futile...because people are so mixed that it's impossible to categorize people...I have some friends from Northern Somalia who traveled in the Southern part of the country and were surprised how people were so dark, whereas people from Southern Somalis dismiss people from Northern Somalis as mixed with Yemeni because they are too light from a Southern Somalia standard...even within Somalia there is a lot of confusion....
Habari, YOU are making generalizations, by trying to make ALL Ethiopians mixed with Yemenis. MOST Ethiopians are NOT mixed with Yemenis and MOST Ethiopians are not LIGHT SKINNED. NORTHERN Somalis are JUST AS DARK as Southern Somalis. Yes, SOME Somalis have Yemeni ancestry and SOME Ethiopians have Yemeni ancestry, but they ALL ARE BLACK. You are making generalizations that have no actual merit, as Ethiopia is a VERY BIG country and ALL of it is populated by BLACK Africans. Trying to make SOME PARTS of the population into ALL of the population is NONSENSE. Ethiopians are BLACKS. Period.
But it is also true that SOME of the Ethiopians and Somalis who have mixed ancestry consider themselves DISTINCT from other Somalis and Ethiopians, but they are NOT the MAJORITY in Ethiopia or Northern Somalia.
Northern Somalia is called Puntland and the capital is Hargeisa:
So please cease that brainwashed westernized horn African NON SENSE.
quote: Well if someone on this forum would finally post evidence that they are Pure unmixed Africans rather than insult my intelligence or claim it's been proven 10000000 times maybe I might be content until then these so called "rebuttals" are pointless and don't address the issue at hand. Give me a study that shows that these peoples are Pure Africans, if you can't produce one then don't even respond to this post just sit there dumbfounded. Quite beating around the bush put up or shut up.
quote: Well if someone on this forum would finally post evidence that they are Pure unmixed Africans rather than insult my intelligence or claim it's been proven 10000000 times maybe I might be content until then these so called "rebuttals" are pointless and don't address the issue at hand. Give me a study that shows that these peoples are Pure Africans, if you can't produce one then don't even respond to this post just sit there dumbfounded. Quite beating around the bush put up or shut up.
Define mixed
Define pure
I'm waiting........
By mixed I mean of anything other than indigenous African ancestry.
By Pure I mean unmixed with anyone who is non African.
Now I've Been waiting for evidence which proves this. I've hear it spouted on this forum thousands of times; Oh they just have narrow noses because they live in mountainous climate it's all Pure unmixed African traits. Now I'm asking you all to prove this point! Don't pst pictures I want studies (and I have presented quite a few on this thread look back)it's your move PUT UP OR SHUT UP!
Posts: 219 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:whitenord wrote: Now I've Been waiting for evidence which proves this. I've hear it spouted on this forum thousands of times; Oh they just have narrow noses because they live in mountainous climate it's all Pure unmixed African traits. Now I'm asking you all to prove this point! Don't pst pictures I want studies (and I have presented quite a few on this thread look back)it's your move PUT UP OR SHUT UP!
What, you think all africans must look like congolose in able to be pure? It's all about climate and landscape, most of northeast africa is dry land and thus the physics of the people is adapted to that land, while most of centralafrica is humid and forest that's why their body and face are different from those in northeast africa, it's all an adaptation to the environment.
Posts: 1554 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
... all I know, is that White Nord clearly does not show understanding of the subject matter and that copy-and-paste 'scholarship' and immature tantrums aren't much of a reason for any us to continue to give it our attention.
Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
White Nord
A banned big lipped primate
Member # 14093
posted
I mean you guys try to make this topic much more complicated then it really is. I only asked for a study which proves that East Africans are authentic unmixed Africans just as Nigerians and west Africans in general would be considered. I know not all Africans look alike, But when you have a group of Africans that borders another continent (unlike the rest of Africa) and that groups of Africans have how should I say...features not typical of most other Africans then by shear logic wouldn't it make since that these peoples are I don't know interbred with the peoples on the continent that they border! Stop being so indenial about this and even if I'm wrong all I ask for are studies which prove me wrong. Instead I get links to previous threads in which the argument was supositely won proving that these peoples are Pure Africans (as in non foreign admixtures) and I see nothing of the sort and in some cases it's even referenced to another thread!
I on the other hand only had to google in Ethiopian genetics and three different studies are listed and all three state that these peoples are mixed. I've even posted two of those studies on this very thread. Lol Why in the Hell is it so hard for you guys to do the same in your case. I'll tell you why because you all have no evidence (or study) to support your championed theory that East Africans are Pure Africans and were the founders of the Egyptian civilization... Oh yes I went there (just as every thread on this forum eventually goes to). I just find it fnny that you all are parading around a myth that is based on a LIE! And you know what I mean.
To end this like I said previously PUT UP OR SHUT UP!
Posts: 219 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
I mean you guys try to make this topic much more complicated then it really is.
The topic is certainly complicated for you, as indicated by this:
I only asked for a study which proves that East Africans are authentic unmixed Africans just as Nigerians and west Africans in general would be considered. - White Nord
White Nord, ever considered first taking biology and genetics 101, before starting topics like this? Just food for thought.
Posts: 233 | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by akoben08: ^ His point is that both contemporary East Africans and Euros show admixture white nerd. Cavelli Sforza has already been exposed by Keita et al. These contemporary genetic studies say nothing for ancient east African especially Egyptian racial make up, which I know is where you want to take this argument. You are showing same desperation as Khazar pseudo scientists in trying to "prove" they are from Levantine Jewry, they managed to fool Ausarianstein though. lol But you are more pathetic, it's wide stretch, and so is your agenda.
How in the Hell can you be sure that they haven't always been mixed and thank you. Someone finally having the ballz to admit that this group has signifigant admixture.
You might want to clarify timelines. You do not need to go outside of Africa to explain the phenotype of the Ethiopians. The climate of Ethiopia is sufficient to explain their adaptation without alegations of some foreign genetic fow. Obviously, like most modern societies, there have been conquests and migration from foreign lands but they are recent events. Also, these genetic reports you cite don't tell us much about when migrations occurred. For that we need skeletal remains. Neolithic remains in East Africa are tropically adapted and show relatedness to other tropical areas in Africa.
Ancient Caucasoid East Africans are still a White Supremist myth. I am open to actual evidence but what I have read leds me to this conclusion. If you are looking for mixture you will need to go further North. European U mtDNA is found amongst the Berbers such as the Kabyles. That is a much more interesting picture and is not seen anywhere else in the world. Essentially we have a maternal European gene with almost non-existent European paternal genes. Very interesting. U is normally found with R1b but not in North Africa.
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
I mean you guys try to make this topic much more complicated then it really is.
The topic is certainly complicated for you, as indicated by this:
I only asked for a study which proves that East Africans are authentic unmixed Africans just as Nigerians and west Africans in general would be considered. - White Nord
White Nord, ever considered first taking biology and genetics 101, before starting topics like this? Just food for thought.
You Afro-nuts need to cut down on the bashing and just give clear, concise and unbias information.
If you want to educate people you need to be willing to provide information in a non-confrontational manner.
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Dumb comment. One needs to know what they're talking about cuz we don't get paid to teach.
Did you read what Ausarian just quoted???
If you want to be here for seven pages discussing bull (disney-style-fantasy postings of people who fantasize of and so distort scientists' statements and findings in favor of their wish full thinking ie 40% or whatevertheHell it is caucasian Ethiopians).
quote:Originally posted by osirion: You Afro-nuts need to cut down on the bashing and just give clear, concise and unbias information.
If you want to educate people you need to be willing to provide information in a non-confrontational manner.
First of all, he didn't even make a statement, or ask for the genetic composition of Ethiopians, and you type as if he's entitled to a response anyway.
He stated that he thought Ethiopians were 'mixed' but was unsure, and when his finding are explained to him, like he asked, he turns around and gayly calls for people to just admit Ethiopians to being 50% caucasian or whatever.
posted
It's absurd to think that narrow noses originated outside Africa, since as anthropological studies indicate most physical features are derived from Africans, and usually in an extreme form like narrower and smaller nose among many east Africans compare to European and West Asians, I'm from East Africa so it's pretty easy to see that...But if you talk about other features like skin tone or hair maybe you can see some form of admixture among some Ethiopians but a large majority don't look mixed..
Posts: 461 | From: Kilimanjaro | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
WHITENORD, If you assume that there racially pure Africans, would you apply the s ame logic to Europe and Asia?
So could you name the pure Europeans as opposed to those that are not pure? And do the same for East Asians. Are some Esat Asians pure and some non-pure?
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
Given that the phenotypical genotypical variations that we find among humans derive from the following well-known biological mechanisms, how exactly are they causative in the creation of racially "pure" groups?
I refer to: 1) assorted mating, 2)genetic drift, 3)bottleneck effects, 4) environmental adaptation by means genomic selection, and 5)chance mutations that spread through a population on purely stochastic grounds, 6)forced assorted mating as in the case of females kidnapped from one group and transported for mating purposes to another group.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Alive-(What Box): ^Dumb comment. One needs to know what they're talking about cuz we don't get paid to teach.
Did you read what Ausarian just quoted???
If you want to be here for seven pages discussing bull (disney-style-fantasy postings of people who fantasize of and so distort scientists' statements and findings in favor of their wish full thinking ie 40% or whatevertheHell it is caucasian Ethiopians).
quote:Originally posted by osirion: You Afro-nuts need to cut down on the bashing and just give clear, concise and unbias information.
If you want to educate people you need to be willing to provide information in a non-confrontational manner.
First of all, he didn't even make a statement, or ask for the genetic composition of Ethiopians, and you type as if he's entitled to a response anyway.
He stated that he thought Ethiopians were 'mixed' but was unsure, and when his finding are explained to him, like he asked, he turns around and gayly calls for people to just admit Ethiopians to being 50% caucasian or whatever.
Some people deserve to be bashed but I don't see the justification in term of White Nord's postings.
The vast majority of Westerners are confused over the subject of the phenotype of NE Africans. I do find it interesting that many Orientals do not see the Ethiopians as being any different than other Black Africans. They simply think they are pretty Black Africans.
I simply think the bashing shows weakness and is a distraction from the points trying to be presented. Of course, bigots should be bashed on points clearly bias. Ethiopians being of mixed ancestry isn't really a point requiring bashing. Claiming that East Africans are Caucasian and yet calling Rev. Jeremy Wright an African American is selective bigotry.
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:The vast majority of Westerners are confused over the subject of the phenotype of NE Africans.
That's the problem with White Nord; he doesn't understand that all human beings look like Africans, even East Asians have similar phenotype to many Southern Africans like khoisans even like some East Africans(the eyes and high bone cheeks). That's where we have the confusion and ignorance, especially among Westerners who have been led by fake ideologist to believe that they where pure which is utter nonsense since they are the most mixed genetically on the face of the earth ...let's educate him...
Posts: 461 | From: Kilimanjaro | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
White Nord
A banned big lipped primate
Member # 14093
For one, "caucasoid" is scientifically bankrupt. What makes a gene "caucasoid", and what are they?
Passarino et a. 1998 pooled Ethiopian groups from a sample taken at a hospital in Addis Ababa, which were mainly self-identified Amhara-speakers. This pooling obscured genomic pattern differentiations across intra-Ethiopic ethnic-lines.
Amhara groups seem to carry relatively more J haplotype bearing Y chromosomes than their Oromo counterparts, but even these appear to date back to some time in the Neolithic period.
Ethiopia is a big country, with at least some 80 different ethnic groups. In fact, it is one of the most diverse nations on mainland Africa. The bulk of these were not tested by Passarino; so, how you can reduce their gene pool to Passarino et al.'s findings, is beyond logic.
Ethiopia has been found to be 'intermediate', primarily because non-African gene pools are a subset of an East African population, and to a lesser extent, secondary to *bi-directional* gene flow between the African Horn and its neighbours. In other words, it is a region genetically composite of deep-rooted lineages that are rare outside of the African continent and more downstream mutations that are common in both Africa and elsewhere - hence, the intermediate location.
Certain maternal haplogroups that are common in "south west Asia" occurred as rare subtypes in Ethiopian samples, like those associated with haplogroup N1 and M1. Some haplogroups like say, M1, have in the past been erroneously referenced as "Eurasian" by some authors, when there is little to no evidence to suggest so.
Now to get to your comments Ethiopians are no more mixed then any other African population. Some Ethiopians have genes that some south arabians have and vice versa. To try and say that the Whole Coutry of Ethiopia is 50/50 mixed is just foolish talk. What we need is studies done on all the Ethnic groups of Ethiopia before we make foolish statements about 50/50 mix. Also I credit you for not getting into a flame war with some posters. Its refreshing to see debate without the insults. Will post more later.
Peace
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
After rereading the thread again I tell you to go back and read Ausarians posts he answers most of your comments and really your studies are all outdated.
I also want to ask what are you trying to prove by saying that Ethopians are some how 50/50 mix? The Oromo the largest Ethnic group has less then 3% hap J The problem is I don't remember what study I read this from. Maybe Rasol or Ausarian, know.
Peace
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
King you are correct, some studies ignore the fact that Amhara and Oromos are different ethnically speaking, and the Oromos who are the majority along other cushitic speaking people have almost no non African genes...that's what White Nord should learn instead of quoting some funny forums...
Posts: 461 | From: Kilimanjaro | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Habari: King you are correct, some studies ignore the fact that Amhara and Oromos are different ethnically speaking, and the Oromos who are the majority along other cushitic speaking people have almost no non African genes...that's what White Nord should learn instead of quoting some funny forums...
^ People like white nerd prefer to stay ignorant, and work hard at it. That's why they recite from the same debunked pseudoes and repeat the same tired trash, never learning anything.
They imagine that their willful ignorance is a 'weapon' when in fact it's just a weakness.
I would say the Afro-Nuts win this discussion. Basically White Nord claims that the Ethiopians are mixed from Neolithic times but doesn't have any evidence whatsoever. No skeletal evidence, linguistic evidence, archaelogical evidence. Basically you want us to believe the Ethiopians are not African and their appearance, culture and history is non-African and yet they are in Africa. You want us to believe that the pirates that enslaved them and destroyed their civilization via military embargoes, raping raids and the like are somehow the original indigenous people. Even though we are quite aware of white supremacy teachings of the last 300 years and its purpose. You would like us to believe you over sensible logic.
The burdern of proof is on you!
Yes you deserve to be bashed.
-------------------- Across the sea of time, there can only be one of you. Make you the best one you can be. Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic