posted
It seem as if as much as 20% of "White" Americans are E1b1a. No wonder there are no studies on American DNA haplogroups.
Posts: 314 | From: Home | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged |
There have been studies by Rick Kittles and others on this topic. On the basis of your thread heading studies have shown that 70% of AAs are E1b1a(Y) and 95% L1 and L2(MtDNA). Also the big Tishkoff(2008) study also analyses the AA genome: it is in one of the 9 African clusters labeled Niger-Kordofanian. There are just 5 other clusters world-wide.
Whether whites are 20% E1a1b is neither here nor there. Greeks are 27% E1b1b/a(?)but they are still white European. I got a good look at them in large numbers on the TV as they are seen daily demonstrating against the EU bailout plan for them. There is also some E in Europe--diminishing as you push westwards.
Don't forget too that Cameroon is home to large numbers of R1--which is one of the major Euro haplogroups.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Albinos only do the Genome of "Selected" Black populations because they already know the expected result. They will NEVER do a full genome of the original Blacks of the Americas, because that would only prove their lies.
My guess is that you would find a lot of "R", "G" and "E" mutations in North America.
Lamin - there is no foundation for the stats. that you quote. No such large scale study was carried out that could produce those results - it's bullshit.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lamin: Whether whites are 20% E1a1b is neither here nor there. Greeks are 27% E1b1b/a(?)but they are still white European.
The Greeks are a colored heterogeneous people. They are not homogenous Europeans like the north western types. Greeks are simply classified very often as "white European" for the same reason Egypt is despite it's diversity. And if I'm being cryptic, that 'reason' is to claim civilizations that meet Eurocentric standards.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
[quote]The Greeks are a colored heterogeneous people.[quote].
Come now, you just gotta disbelieve your lying eyes. Arianna Huffington[before marriage: Stassinopoulos]is the Greek[now American] owner of the Huffingtonpost. She is on CNN international a lot. A totally white woman. And they are all like that. Just look at a Greek crowd demonstrating against the EU bank conditions. Check the Greek Prime Minister, Lucas Papademos, and what do you see? A totally white man. Let's be serious now.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
And by the way, the black admixture of U.S. white populations is put at 0.7%.
Last week I commented to Brada-Anansi that it was foolish to expect a serious discussion when it was clear that most members lit a joint before signing on - thanks for making my point.
We genotyped a panel of 1327 polymorphic markers, consisting of 848 microsatellites, 476 indels (insertions/deletions), and three SNPs (single-nucleotide polymorphisms), in 2432 Africans from 113 geographically diverse populations (fig. S1), 98 African Americans, and 21 Yemenites (table S1). To incorporate preexisting African data and to place African genetic variability into a worldwide context, we integrated these data with data from the panel of markers genotyped in 952 worldwide individuals from the CEPH-HGDP (Centre d'Étude du Polymorphisme Humain–Human Genome Diversity Panel) (8-10) in 432 individuals of Indian descent (11) and in 10 Native Australians (tables S1 and S2).Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^For those not under the influence of something or other. Common sense must tell you that studies like the above are fit only for lining the bird cage.
Any serious study of Black Americans (NOT African Americans, we really don't know who they are yet) must be limited to descendants of Black Americans pre 1880, because the immigration of people of color after that time contaminated the gene pool.
Next carefully selected old population pools must be selected. I would personally use Massachusetts, Illinois, Virginia, Florida, Louisiana, Nova Scotia, and Long Island New york.
If any of you can trouble yourselves to search for prominent Blacks from those populations, you will find a great diversity in the people. I will leave it to you to figure out what it means.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Any serious study of Black Americans (NOT African Americans, we really don't know who they are yet) must be limited to descendants of Black Americans pre 1880, because the immigration of people of color after that time contaminated the gene pool.
Not smoking any thing and just not making sense of what you are saying.
1)Because of racist U.S. immigration policy relatively very few blacks from outside the U.S. traveled to the U.S. before the Civil Rights era.
2) Even now the percentage of non-U.S. born blacks in the U.S. black population is just about 8-9%. Before the 1970s it was just about 3%.
3) So the Tishkoff study would be right on the money.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
^For the lurkers: Lamin has obviously been well indoctrinated in White-man nonsense. But the facts are quite different. Mexicans are the current wave of low wage non-white immigrants. Before them Asians and Caribbeans snuck-in or were imported for those purposes, the intention was always that they would go back, but most didn't. In subsequent census they became part of the "Colored" population. The records that I have seen are not quite clear as to when this began, that is why I use 1880 as a "Safe" cut-off, but it could be later.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lamin: Whether whites are 20% E1a1b is neither here nor there. Greeks are 27% E1b1b/a(?)but they are still white European.
The Greeks are a colored heterogeneous people. They are not homogenous Europeans like the north western types. Greeks are simply classified very often as "white European" for the same reason Egypt is despite it's diversity. And if I'm being cryptic, that 'reason' is to claim civilizations that meet Eurocentric standards.
Lol. Are you being sarcastic?
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mike, In theoretical statistics--supported empirically--a the Central Limit Theorem states that a sample size of minimum 30 will get you sufficiently close to the population--if you choose your sample items judiciously. Note that polling in the U.S. for 300 million people uses sample sizes of 1,000 households.
I doubt that the black U.S. population is 50 million--based on a number of sampling statistics I have looked at.
If you have better statistics with clear evidence how you got them would be better than evasions like "White-man nonsense".
Asians--East or South--were/are never lumped in with the U.S. black population for whatever statistical reasons.
Again, you should just address the Tishkoff study point by point and maybe we can make some progress.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Any serious study of Black Americans (NOT African Americans, we really don't know who they are yet) must be limited to descendants of Black Americans pre 1880, because the immigration of people of color after that time contaminated the gene pool.
Not smoking any thing and just not making sense of what you are saying.
1)Because of racist U.S. immigration policy relatively very few blacks from outside the U.S. traveled to the U.S. before the Civil Rights era.
2) Even now the percentage of non-U.S. born blacks in the U.S. black population is just about 8-9%. Before the 1970s it was just about 3%.
3) So the Tishkoff study would be right on the money.
lamin, you have to understand where Mike is coming from. In his groundbreaking new analysis he shows that the majority of blacks who came into America were indigenous Black Europeans rather than Africans. White people pulled a scam trying to make us believe we were Africans.
Another lie you will hear from the likes of the albino is that mankind originated in Africa. That is what they like to promote, Dr. Leakey type shyt. Thats' because they want to get us off the fact that mankind started in Europe with the Black Europeans, In fact it was only later our people went from Europe into Africa. This is before white people even dared to exist
Posts: 42932 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lamin: [QB] On the basis of your thread heading studies have shown that 70% of AAs are E1b1a(Y) and 95% L1 and L2(MtDNA).
Your big Tishkoff study didn't show much with its paltry sample of 98 African-Americans who were probably carefully selected.
Posts: 314 | From: Home | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:The Greeks are a colored heterogeneous people.
.
Come now, you just gotta disbelieve your lying eyes.
It's got nothing to do with eyes. Their lineages are predominantly AfroAsiatic.
quote: Arianna Huffington[before marriage: Stassinopoulos]is the Greek[now American] owner of the Huffingtonpost. She is on CNN international a lot. A totally white woman.
No, she is a woman of color if we apply the typical sum of AfroAsiatic lineage to her at least. It is worth noting Greeks are 1/4th African and 3/4ths of their ancestry come from Europe and Asia. Expecting many of them to look exactly like a stereotypical "black African" is sheer foolishness. But between their African and Asian heritage, they are predominantly non European in their lineages.
quote:And they are all like that. Just look at a Greek crowd demonstrating against the EU bank conditions. Check the Greek Prime Minister, Lucas Papademos, and what do you see? A totally white man. Let's be serious now.
Again, regardless of what you *see* they are a people of mostly AfroAsiatic lineage. Even if you do not wish to say they are black, you must acknowledge they are a colored people.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
A sample size of over 30 is all that good statistics requires. So what exactly are you objecting to? I mean just by looking at AAs you know right away that they originated from Africa.
The same for East Asians and South Asians.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:The Greeks are a colored heterogeneous people.
.
Come now, you just gotta disbelieve your lying eyes.
It's got nothing to do with eyes. Their lineages are predominantly AfroAsiatic.
quote: Arianna Huffington[before marriage: Stassinopoulos]is the Greek[now American] owner of the Huffingtonpost. She is on CNN international a lot. A totally white woman.
No, she is a woman of color if we apply the general sum to her at least. It is worth noting Greeks are 1/4th African and 3/4ths of their ancestry come from Europe and Asia. Expecting many of them to look exactly like a stereotypical "black African" is sheer foolishness. But between their African and Asian heritage, they are predominantly non European in their lineages.
quote:And they are all like that. Just look at a Greek crowd demonstrating against the EU bank conditions. Check the Greek Prime Minister, Lucas Papademos, and what do you see? A totally white man. Let's be serious now.
Again, regardless of what you *see* they are a people of mostly AfroAsiatic lineage. Even if you do not wish to say they are black, you must acknowledge they are a colored people.
1/4 of Greeks do not have African lineages, and what is an Afro-Asiatic lineage? How on earth did the Greeks turn ''predominantly Afro-Asiatic'' all of a sudden? 25% African paternal lineages translates to them having 12.5% African lineages, not 25% African lineages. The Asian lineages they carry has nothing to do with Africans, don't try to 'trojan horse' it in like it is African, using the faulty linguistic term 'Afro-Asiatic'. The ancestors of Greeks ARE Asians, so their Asian lineages are not out of the ordinary.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
I didn't have the maternal DNA but I was assuming it was the same. If you have evidence that the proportion is significantly different I'd be glad to review that information. However, looking at just their paternal lineage, they're probably at minimum 1/4th colored. I wasnt suggesting btw that Asian lineages have anything to do with Africans. I said Greeks are clearly a colored people. Subscribing to the notion they are colored, does not necessarily require anyone to subscribe to a group being black. Chinese people are people of color and are Asian. They are not however, black.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Even if you would wish to be skeptical of it Lioness (which is besides my concern at the moment), the argument is that she is a colored woman. An Afro/Asian/Euro mix. Greeks are a poor example of 'pure' Euros.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: I didn't have the maternal DNA but I was assuming it was the same. If you have evidence that the proportion is significantly different I'd be glad to review that information. However, looking at just their paternal lineage, they're probably at minimum 1/4th colored. I wasnt suggesting btw that Asian lineages have anything to do with Africans. I said Greeks are clearly a colored people. Subscribing to the notion they are colored, does not necessarily require anyone to subscribe to a group being black. Chinese people are people of color and are Asian. They are not however, black.
You don't have to review your position for anyone, I'm just stating what's inaccurate about it. I've been reading about this topic long enough to know that nothing has been published about Greeks that suggests that they're anything other than predominantly tied to their own region. That type of thinking (one drop of foreign blood in your population makes your population non-indigenous) is the very reason why ES has been having these wars with Euronuts for god knows how many years. You've been fighting it, and now you're doing it yourself.
All this 'coloreds' 'Afro-Asiatic' stuff, needs to stop, because it's really nothing more than a smoke screen, to disguise that users of those terms can't back up their claims with factual data. You proved it by admitting your claims about them being predominantly ''Afro-Asiatic'' relied on assumptions.
With a bit of verbal gymnastics and empty rethoric, we can make nearly all populations something they're not, using a few lineages that didn't originate in the region they now inhabit.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: [qb] I didn't have the maternal DNA but I was assuming it was the same. If you have evidence that the proportion is significantly different I'd be glad to review that information. However, looking at just their paternal lineage, they're probably at minimum 1/4th colored. I wasnt suggesting btw that Asian lineages have anything to do with Africans. I said Greeks are clearly a colored people. Subscribing to the notion they are colored, does not necessarily require anyone to subscribe to a group being black. Chinese people are people of color and are Asian. They are not however, black.
You don't have to review your position for anyone, I'm just stating what's inaccurate about it. I've been reading about this topic long enough to know that nothing has been published about Greeks that suggests that they're anything other than predominantly tied to their own region.
In terms of where their lineages come from we would have to have their maternal data to confirm this, not that being majority European proves they are not mixed.
quote: That type of thinking (one drop of foreign blood in your population makes your population non-indigenous) is the very reason why ES has been having these wars with Euronuts for god knows how many years. You've been fighting it, and now you're doing it yourself.
I do so a couple of reasons. Whiteness as a social construct and concept was defined by them as Euro homogeneity (or inbreeding to put it in a less savory fashion). Blackness was a term that encompassed mixed peoples. That is why it is fine for people to argue an Egyptian were black even if there were foreign influences, while at the same time arguing a Greek is not white because of the African and Asian backgrounds. The black and white social groups were formed along these lines and it is not my problem if it is coming back to bite Euro racists in the ass. I've already said it, I'm not hear to pacify their butthurt. The black community was formed upon a principle of heterogeneity and now we want to behave as though it did not? To let the definitions of what it means to be black or white change means we allow goalposts change. I cannot prove that ___ is not inferior if the definition for what ____ is, is constantly changing.
quote:All this 'coloreds' 'Afro-Asiatic' stuff, needs to stop, because it's really nothing more than a smoke screen, to disguise that users of those terms can't back up their claims with factual data. You proved it by admitting your claims about them being predominantly ''Afro-Asiatic'' relied on assumptions.
Proved what? Even if (and I stress if as I have no maternal data) they are not predominantly Afro Asiatic, whiteness as a concept was defined by principles of European homogeneity. Greeks are by their paternal lineage alone too diverse a people to classify them as homogenous European people. And even if we were to reject the notion that they are black they certainly should be classified as colored lest we overlook their lack of homogeneity.
quote:^^ yet the fun thing about the one drop rule is a one way rule
Because whiteness was defined by Euro homogeneity while blackness defined by heterogeneity.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:In terms of where their lineages come from we would have to have their maternal data to confirm this,
We wouldn't need their maternal data, because the African paternal lineage they carry is found throughout Europe and West Asia, indicating, that they were brought there by the same prehistoric migration(s). Nowhere along this route, from Africa to Europe via the Levant, are E-M78 sub lineages correlated with L lineages in a manner that makes it worth speculating that those lineages are present in Greece in higher than negligible levels. Greece is simply a region where those aforementioned prehistoric E-M78 sub lineages were preserved better; it is not at all the only European region where those paternal lineages are found.
quote:not that being majority European proves they are not mixed.
Now you're moving the goalpost. First you said they were heterogeneous, coloreds, predominantly Afro-Asiatic etc, and now that it dawns on you that they could actually predominantly European, they're still mixed (whatever that means). You're clearly emotionally attached to your idea of the Greeks being predominantly Afro-Asiatic.
quote:I do so a couple of reasons. Whiteness as a social construct and concept was defined by them as Euro homogeneity (or inbreeding to put it in a less savory fashion). Blackness was a term that encompassed mixed peoples. That is why it is fine for people to argue an Egyptian were black even if there were foreign influences, while at the same time arguing a Greek is not white because of the African and Asian backgrounds. The black and white social groups were formed along these lines and it is not my problem if it is coming back to bite Euro racists in the ass. I've already said it, I'm not hear to pacify their butthurt. The black community was formed upon a principle of heterogeneity and now we want to behave as though it did not? To let the definitions of what it means to be black or white change means we allow goalposts change. I cannot prove that ___ is not inferior if the definition for what ____ is, is constantly changing.
Your arguments are every bit as arbitrary and subject to change as the arguments you have issues with (you've just admitted that being predominantly local in origin is compatible with the idea of being ''mixed''). If you want to disregard fact, in favor of basing your worldview on getting back at white people, and reacting to the past, more power to you.
quote:Proved what? Even if (and I stress if as I have no maternal data) they are not predominantly Afro Asiatic, whiteness as a concept was defined by principles of European homogeneity. Greeks are by their paternal lineage alone too diverse a people to classify them as homogenous European people.
Like I said, you're emotionally attached to your idea of Greeks being Afro-Asiatic. You have issues with what has happened in the past, and you're adhering to a mirror image of what you're criticizing. Your stay on ES should have clued you in by now that constructs (both yours, and theirs) are not considered valid/useful ways of talking about populations and variation, here, or anywhere else in the scientific community. Why do you keep adhering to constructs, while being fully aware of scientific alternatives?
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Omo Baba: It seem as if as much as 20% of "White" Americans are E1b1a. No wonder there are no studies on American DNA haplogroups.
This is because the haplogroup is done on a single lineage. This is why even Hit_er had an African aplogroup. It is essentially means nothing. One could be almost completely African and have maternal and paternal ydna haplogroups.
I know one relative through marriage from ancestry.com. She has a mitochondrial or maternal haplotype that came back Ashkenazic related. If she is descended from a European slave master on her fathers fathers her paternal haplotype is also going to come back anything from French to Viking.
Than where does that leave her in learning about her ancestors. Such studies dealing with a single ancestor of as much as 10 years ago is not going to tell you much about your ancestry - especially if u are a European in Britain, is it.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Greece is simply a region where those aforementioned prehistoric E-M78 sub lineages were preserved better; it is not at all the only European region where those paternal lineages are found.
Not sayin that it was the only European region where such paternal lineages could be found. Greece is still an example significant mix. its too much to consider them homogenous Europeans.
quote:
quote:not that being majority European proves they are not mixed.
Now you're moving the goalpost. First you said they were heterogeneous, coloreds, predominantly Afro-Asiatic etc, and now that it dawns on you that they could actually predominantly European, they're still mixed (whatever that means).
My goal posts never shifted. You simply been ignoring my argument up until now and haven't a full scope of the history of what I've said, when I've said it. I was sayin Italians were non white when they are were not in my head predominantly Afro Asiatic (assuming their maternal data is not much different. So howd you think my belief that being colored relied on their even needing to be mostlyfrom outside of Europe? Ya you haven't been following me cept maybe this thread.
quote: You're clearly emotionally attached to your idea of the Greeks being predominantly Afro-Asiatic.
They do not need to be predominantly afro asiatic & me sayin Italians arent white when i knew they werent mostly foreign (in other topics) proves it. they dont have to be mostly foreigners to qualify as a colored people.
quote:Your arguments are every bit as arbitrary and subject to change as the arguments you have issues with (you've just admitted that being predominantly local in origin is compatible with the idea of being ''mixed''). If you want to disregard fact, in favor of basing your worldview on getting back at white people, and reacting to the past, more power to you.
Who said anything about "getting back" at white people? I am not endorsing supremacy of any kind.One could easily take from the fact the civilizations they hold in such high regard were mixed as being implication of examples of "races" who worked together. If a white supremacist refuses to see "true negros" make anything w/o foreigners and cant come up with an example for homogenous Euros the implication would be "civilizations" came cause they worked together.
quote:
quote:Proved what? Even if (and I stress if as I have no maternal data) they are not predominantly Afro Asiatic, whiteness as a concept was defined by principles of European homogeneity. Greeks are by their paternal lineage alone too diverse a people to classify them as homogenous European people.
Like I said, you're emotionally attached to your idea of Greeks being Afro-Asiatic.
My first post here questioned the need to even see "achievement" or "civilization" by Euro standards. Even if the white racist could provide a homogenous example of civilization by his own standards that excels past heterogeneous Euros, dont rely on heterogeneous Euros nor foreigners I from the very beginning have questioned the need to understand intellect, "civilization" and achievement by a Eurocentric standard. Not really any skin off my nose if he can actually pull it off.
quote:Your stay on ES should have clued you in by now that constructs (both yours, and theirs) are not considered valid/useful ways of talking about populations and variation, here, or anywhere else in the scientific community. Why do you keep adhering to constructs, while being fully aware of scientific alternatives?
Even if there are scientific alternatives race still has heavy social implications and talking about racial supremacy through the race construct itself would probably be easier to follow for the common man. Werent people talking about Rihanna's Thanksgiving went? I think we can talk about other things that impact society far more even if its not hard science going down.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: I didn't have the maternal DNA but I was assuming it was the same. If you have evidence that the proportion is significantly different I'd be glad to review that information. However, looking at just their paternal lineage, they're probably at minimum 1/4th colored. I wasnt suggesting btw that Asian lineages have anything to do with Africans. I said Greeks are clearly a colored people. Subscribing to the notion they are colored, does not necessarily require anyone to subscribe to a group being black. Chinese people are people of color and are Asian. They are not however, black.
So you are saying race is a social construct, and that if the "one-drop" rule is applied to blacks, then it can in turn be applied to whites, like the Greeks, who based on various "drops," become "colored"?
DO you extend your "reverse one-drop" model to Europeans as a whole? Conservative Cavalli-Sforza who uses a race model, found them to be not a primary race at all, but hybrids. This seems to suggest that ALL Europeans are to some extent "mixed" in terms of general human gene flow and the Greeks cannot be singled out.
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
The mistake people are making is to assume that different haplogroups correlate with phenotype. Different hgs arise simply because of some chance reshuffling of ACGT on DNA strings. They also signify the time spread between MRCAs. That's all.
And thirdly, people don't seem to understand than the so-called continents are just human-made designations. The landmass that we call Asia should also include its Westernmost peninsula, Europe, But Europe has been artificially made into a continent by Eurocentric ideology.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Your big Tishkoff study didn't show much with its paltry sample of 98 African-Americans who were probably carefully selected.
.
In statistics you can do a lot of inferential analysis with a sample size of just 30.
The Tishkoff study is called "big" beacuse it's the largest to date on the population genetics of Africa and its U.S. diaspora. That's the claim.
But what exactly is your point?
Anyone steeping into a "black church" in the U.S. on a Sunday morning will have to conclude that those people's forbears came from Africa. Why is such a trivial point so difficult to grasp.
Similarly, just looking at Jeremy Lin, the new basketball sensation, one immediately knows that his forbears are from somewhere in East Asia.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The problem too is that the human mind--just like its creation, the computer--prefers to think in binary terms: A or B. Thus someone who says I am both Christian and Muslim is seen as odd. Or someone in the U.S. who says I am both Republican a nd Democrat will be told: "that's not possible"--even though in practice, politicians and presidents wear the 2 hats at the same time. Just that they don't say it.
So it is with regard to "race talk".
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
^He's been here for 8 years, and I'm just now realizing that he's an ignoramus. How did that happen?
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jim Jones: You mother is an ignoramus
Ah yes, one of the long-time crack-heads. Who did you used to be before you became Jim Jones? My guess is that in the 7 years that you have been here, a stupid comment with a smiley face is your biggest contribution. What a sorry creature you are.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: [qb] I didn't have the maternal DNA but I was assuming it was the same. If you have evidence that the proportion is significantly different I'd be glad to review that information. However, looking at just their paternal lineage, they're probably at minimum 1/4th colored. I wasnt suggesting btw that Asian lineages have anything to do with Africans. I said Greeks are clearly a colored people. Subscribing to the notion they are colored, does not necessarily require anyone to subscribe to a group being black. Chinese people are people of color and are Asian. They are not however, black.
So you are saying race is a social construct, and that if the "one-drop" rule is applied to blacks, then it can in turn be applied to whites, like the Greeks, who based on various "drops," become "colored"?
You call them "whites" but again I dont see them that way. They are people who so happen to live in Europe with enough foreign ancestry not to be white.
quote:DO you extend your "reverse one-drop" model to Europeans as a whole?
I'm not using my own model. I'm using a model that they imposed and deconstructing notions of racial supremacy from that model because it is possible. The supremacist can understand he is not superior to anyone else easier through his own construct (when possible) rather than one imposed upon him by another person.
quote: Conservative Cavalli-Sforza who uses a race model, found them to be not a primary race at all, but hybrids. This seems to suggest that ALL Europeans are to some extent "mixed" in terms of general human gene flow and the Greeks cannot be singled out.
The first problem is when i was sayin your throwing on em another model that doesn't even regard them as a race over their initial construct. Euros are mixed? saying thats not gonna do much socially. First problem? In the diaspora most blacks are probably to some level mixed with Euros or some other group.Someone who is 75% African gets lumped in the same group as Euros cause Euros are a mixed people like the mostly African person. Yeaa that's not gonna happen. With a respect to how social groups were formed Cavalli-Sforza will do very little. Whats important now is showin that Black social groups arent inferior by using the social constructs that built the groups if possible (which i feel it is).
Another problem is supremacists feel that whatever composes their more homogenous Euro lineages is what makes them superior even if it is certain levels of mixtures between Africans and Asians. So lets say the average homogenous Euro is 2/3rd Asian and 1/3rd African. They feel that this degree of mix makes them superior and to add much more to that would make them inferior. How much more? We have the one drop rule to tell us. So I'm not convinced that saying they are mixed would end ideas of Euro supremacy.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Greece is simply a region where those aforementioned prehistoric E-M78 sub lineages were preserved better; it is not at all the only European region where those paternal lineages are found.
Not sayin that it was the only European region where such paternal lineages could be found. Greece is still an example significant mix. its too much to consider them homogenous Europeans.
By what standard? By what standard, other than your own bias, is 12,5% non-local input considered ‘’a significant mix’’.
quote:My goal posts never shifted. You simply been ignoring my argument up until now and haven't a full scope of the history of what I've said, when I've said it. I was sayin Italians were non white when they are were not in my head predominantly Afro Asiatic (assuming their maternal data is not much different. So howd you think my belief that being colored relied on their even needing to be mostlyfrom outside of Europe? Ya you haven't been following me cept maybe this thread.
It doesn’t matter how many times you’ve expressed your opinions, or who was/wasn’t around. If you randomly switch back and forth between using lineages and using some other, yet to be named classification system, it only furthers my point how arbitrary and non-falsifiable your assertions are. To further my point: you’ve even made up new meanings for existing words. The fact that you have hijack word like ‘Colored’, and ‘Afro-Asiatic’, and have trouble describing the Greek so-called Afro-Asiatic status in concrete terms, shows me you’re trying to define something that doesn’t exist.
quote:They do not need to be predominantly afro asiatic & me sayin Italians arent white when i knew they werent mostly foreign (in other topics) proves it. they dont have to be mostly foreigners to qualify as a colored people.
You clearly said them being different from was due to them being not ‘’pure’’, and you gave Northern Europeans as an example for what you considered ‘’pure’’. If them being colored doesn’t rely on their lineages, your whole case implodes, because whatever color they have would then simply be a function of the region they adapted to, which would tie them to their region even more. Not to mention that you’d have to give up the special status the Greeks have according to you, because most populations could be considered colored relative to pale Northern Europeans, which would even further weaken your use of that word, as it would cease denote anything useful.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lamin: A sample size of over 30 is all that good statistics requires. So what exactly are you objecting to? I mean just by looking at AAs you know right away that they originated from Africa.
The same for East Asians and South Asians.
Lamin I usually agree with you but even I have to say that this cannot be an accurate study. 30 people out of 40+ million - not 50 million - cannot yield and accurate assessment. Its not even logically comprehensible.
Posts: 951 | From: where rules end and freedom begins | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lamin: The mistake people are making is to assume that different haplogroups correlate with phenotype. Different hgs arise simply because of some chance reshuffling of ACGT on DNA strings. They also signify the time spread between MRCAs. That's all.
And thirdly, people don't seem to understand than the so-called continents are just human-made designations. The landmass that we call Asia should also include its Westernmost peninsula, Europe, But Europe has been artificially made into a continent by Eurocentric ideology.
^Good point!
Posts: 951 | From: where rules end and freedom begins | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
In population genetics, the logical direction forward is to go by trends. Studies around Y-DNA, HbS, and HLA for example, have come out that do point to a considerable preservation of markers in Greek specimens that are more popular in Africa and the so-called "southwest Asia". Semino et al.'s "The Genetic Legacy of Paleolithic Homo sapiens sapiens in Extant Europeans" serves as such an example, wherein Greeks were among the European samples with the least amount of modal European markers, and coincidentally with the most amount of clades more popular outside of Europe. Generally, "recent" African input is more acute in European areas along the shores of the Mediterranean sea than those further up north; results of Greece seem to quintessentially exemplify this.
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
And by the way, the black admixture of U.S. white populations is put at 0.7%.
Lamin is correct that 30 subjects is a good sample for any study.
Mike is correct this study is a farce. In any research project you compare two equal groups, e.g., 15 subjects in group A and 15 subjects in group B.
This study is neither reliable or valid because the comparisons are made between groups that are unequal. How can you have valid resullts comparing 98 AAs to 2432 Africans???
This is a descriptive study but it really tells us nothing about African and AA genetic structure. Given the fact that the groups are unequal any mean scores reported in the article are unreliable since you can not get an accurate average of each group’s genetic structure in comparison to any other group in this study.
The authors of the study could possibly give frequencies for the individual groups in the study, but not means . This makes the probability of occurrence (indicated by p<.01) or level of significance cited in this artcle for each group nonesense.
The failure of this study to provide an accurate account of the genetic structure of African people is due to the fact the researchers used an available sample made up of varying numbers of subjects from diverse African populations, that were never placed in uniform groups for purposes of comparison. Without randomization, and comparing each African population representing two equal groups that are representative of the populations being compared, there is no way you can show statistical significance and make inferences about the parameters of a selected population. The authors are improperly using the p value to make it appear that their research has practical or theorectical significance, when it is worthless, unreliable and lacks any validity.
quote:Originally posted by lamin: [quote]The Greeks are a colored heterogeneous people.[quote].
Come now, you just gotta disbelieve your lying eyes. Arianna Huffington[before marriage: Stassinopoulos]is the Greek[now American] owner of the Huffingtonpost. She is on CNN international a lot. A totally white woman. And they are all like that. Just look at a Greek crowd demonstrating against the EU bank conditions. Check the Greek Prime Minister, Lucas Papademos, and what do you see? A totally white man. Let's be serious now.
Although I have seen a few Greeks that most would never guess were white, the vast majority are definitely what one could consider white. I think many of the darker- skinned ones - who could give the darker Etruscans "a good run for their money" - may come from a certain area and mountainous area. I forget the name of it.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic