quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: ^ Europe is Western Eurasia, not Africa. Eurasia is a continent. Historically Mongoloids radiated from Eastern Eurasia and West - Caucasoids.
Cass - these Mongol people all show obvious affinity with Africa. .
.
But they show absolutely NO AFFINITY with these people - can you explain?
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: ^ Europe is Western Eurasia, not Africa. Eurasia is a continent. Historically Mongoloids radiated from Eastern Eurasia and West - Caucasoids.
If AMH did not once adhere to loose geographical boundaries, then the phenotype diversity you see today - would simply not exist.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
Cass - these Mongol people all show obvious affinity with Africa..
No they don't, Asians are further genetically from Africans than Europeans are to Africans and peep the hair. And except for San European eye shape is closer to Bantu and most other Africans Posts: 43005 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: ^ Europe is Western Eurasia, not Africa. Eurasia is a continent. Historically Mongoloids radiated from Eastern Eurasia and West - Caucasoids.
Cass - these Mongol people all show obvious affinity with Africa. .
You stand correct,
quote: Y-DNA haplogroup A contains lineages deriving from the earliest branching in the human Y chromosome tree. The oldest branching event, separating A0-P305 and A1-V161, is thought to have occurred about 140,000 years ago. Haplogroups A0-P305, A1a-M31 and A1b1a-M14 are restricted to Africa and A1b1b-M32 is nearly restricted to Africa. The haplogroup that would be named A1b2 is composed of haplogroups B through T. The internal branching of haplogroup A1-V161 into A1a-M31, A1b1, and BT (A1b2) may have occurred about 110,000 years ago. A0-P305 is found at low frequency in Central and West Africa. A1a-M31 is observed in northwestern Africans; A1b1a-M14 is seen among click language-speaking Khoisan populations. A1b1b-M32 has a wide distribution including Khoisan speaking and East African populations, and scattered members on the Arabian Peninsula.
Y-DNA haplogroup B, like Y-DNA haplogroup A, is seen only in Africa and is scattered widely, but thinly across the continent. B is thought to have arisen approximately 50,000 years ago. These haplogroups have higher frequencies among hunter-gather groups in Ethiopia and Sudan, and are also seen among click language-speaking populations. The patchy, widespread distribution of these haplogroups may mean that they are remnants of ancient lineages that once had a much wider range but have been largely displaced by more recent population events.
quote: quote: Some geographic structuring is seen between the sub-groups B2a (B-M150) and B2b (B-M112). Sub-group B2b is seen among Central African Pygmies and South African Khoisan. Sub-group B2a is seen among Cameroonians, East Africans, and among South African Bantu speakers. B2a1a (B-M109) is the most commonly seen sub-group of B2a. About 2.3% of African-Americans belong to haplogroup B - with 1.5% of them belonging to the sub-group B2a1a.
Posts: 22245 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^^ evrey haplogroup leads back to Africa. Asians have a greater genetic distance form Africans than do Europeans. One look at a world map also supports this geographically
Genetic Variation Among World Populations: Inferences From 100 Alu Insertion Polymorphisms
W. Scott Watkins,1 Alan R. Rogers,2 Christopher T. Ostler,1 Steve Wooding,1 Michael J. Bamshad,1,3 Anna-Marie E. Brassington,1 Marion L. Carroll,4 Son V. Nguyen,5 Jerilyn A. Walker,5 B.V. Ravi Prasad,6 P. Govinda Reddy,7 Pradipta K. Das,8 Mark A. Batzer,5 and Lynn B. Jorde1,9
Posts: 43005 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol: ^Lyin', if you don't understand it, just stfu!
quote: Mongol people all show obvious affinity with Africa
every human as an affinity to Africa
If you want to claim that Mongols have a closer affinity to Africans than do Europeans you will be putting forward bullshit, they have less
Posts: 43005 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ALL Eurasians are derived from Africa yes, because that is where humans originated. However in the case of Europeans, they show ADMIXTURE because not only do they have their own indigenous Eurasian lineages but recent ones that developed in Africa after their own Eurasian ones. We all know your real problem with this FACT is this means Euros like yourself have African admixture which bothers you greatly. [/QB]
posted
^Note that the silly-assed Albinos used three African Pygmy groups in their study.
But aside from the pygmies in Central Africa such as the Aka, Efé and Mbuti. There are also pygmies in Australia, Thailand, Malaysia, the Andaman Islands Indonesia, the Philippines, Papua New Guinea, and Brazil, including some of the Negritos of Southeast Asia.
Do you suppose that if the ass-hole Albinos had compared them, they would still say that there is genetic distance?
Point being, most Albino studies are pure nonsense, they're just trying to get their names out there.
Best rule of thumb: If Cass or Lioness posts it, it is likely nonsense.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
LOL, Don't you mean if Mike or any of his Kill Whitey, Genocide Whitey co-horts posts it its likely nonsense LOL ROTFLMBO.
Posts: 3257 | From: Madisonville, KY USA | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
No Cass, it was and is, stupid Albino bullsh1t intended to establish separation from Africa for European Albinos. i.e. "How can Whites be Black Albinos if our genes are different".
The logic of it was always totally stupid: i.e. Australians, South Asians and Oceanians never came into contact with Neanderthal, what about them?
It's all about a bunch of silly-assed Albinos trying to establish something unique about themselves.
And all they find is that their only uniqueness lies in their LACK OF MELANIN - they are Albinos.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh,oh, I just realized something. The Neanderthal thing is the centerpiece of Van's rationale. I sure hope he doesn't see this new bullsh1t study, no tellin what he'll do.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
You love pseudo-Afrocentric mike-types so much. If he wasn't here what would your life be like?
Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
No Cass, it was and is, stupid Albino bullsh1t intended to establish separation from Africa for European Albinos. i.e. "How can Whites be Black Albinos if our genes are different".
The logic of it was always totally stupid: i.e. Australians, South Asians and Oceanians never came into contact with Neanderthal, what about them?
It's all about a bunch of silly-assed Albinos trying to establish something unique about themselves.
And all they find is that their only uniqueness lies in their LACK OF MELANIN - they are Albinos.
They are garbage to me, but i'm sure someone finds them interesting. The shift from physical anthropology to genetics occurred since people thought if you talk about something you cannot see in everyday life (unlike facial features, skin colour or hair texture) that this would not promote strife or barriers between the races. The idea is nuts, after all visible differences are racial, but more to the point are how people identify. People don't identify in the street by going to up someone and asking them their haplogroups.
Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
No Cass, it was and is, stupid Albino bullsh1t intended to establish separation from Africa for European Albinos. i.e. "How can Whites be Black Albinos if our genes are different".
The logic of it was always totally stupid: i.e. Australians, South Asians and Oceanians never came into contact with Neanderthal, what about them?
Mike you are stupid and uniformed 6% of the DNA of Melanesians and Australian Aboriginies derive from the Denisovan < cousin of the Neanderthals
Posts: 43005 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Denisovan: Denisova hominins are Paleolithic-era members of the genus Homo that "May" belong to a previously unknown species of human. In March 2010, scientists announced the discovery of a finger bone fragment of a juvenile female who lived about 41,000 years ago, found in the remote Denisova Cave in the Altai Mountains in Siberia, a cave which has also been inhabited by Neanderthals and modern humans. A tooth and toe bone belonging to different members of the same population have since been reported.
Analysis of the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) of the finger bone showed it to be genetically distinct from the mtDNAs of Neanderthals and modern humans. Subsequent study of the nuclear genome from this specimen suggests that this group shares a common origin with Neanderthals, that they ranged from Siberia to Southeast Asia, and that they lived among and interbred with the ancestors of some present-day modern humans, with up to 6% of the DNA of Melanesians and Australian Aborigines deriving from Denisovans. Similar analysis of a toe bone discovered in 2011 is underway.
They can't figure out that they're Albinos, but they know everything else. Damn Albinos sure are full of sh1t.Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
Paleoanthropologists do not even agree if Neanderthals are Homo sapiens but you didn't know that
The Denisova genome diverged from the reference human genome 11.7% (CI: 11.4–12.0%) of the way back along the lineage to the human– chimpanzee ancestor. For the Vindija Neanderthal, the divergence is 12.2% (CI: 11.9–12.5%). Thus, whereas the divergence of the Denisova mtDNA to present-day human mtDNAs is about twice as deep as that of Neanderthal mtDNA, the average divergence of the Denisova nuclear genome from present-day humans is similar to that of Neanderthals. The Denisova genome diverged from the reference human genome 11.7% (CI: 11.4–12.0%) of the way back along the lineage to the human– chimpanzee ancestor. For the Vindija Neanderthal, the divergence is 12.2% (CI: 11.9–12.5%). Thus, whereas the divergence of the Denisova mtDNA to present-day human mtDNAs is about twice as deep as that of Neanderthal mtDNA, the average divergence of the Denisova nuclear genome from present-day humans is similar to that of Neanderthals The number of sites where the Denisova individual and Neanderthal cluster to the exclusion of the Yoruba and chimpanzee is 46,362, compared with an average of 22,012 sites for the other two possible patterns (Yoruba and Denisova, or Yoruba and Neanderthal). This excess of sites where Denisova and Neanderthal cluster supports the view that the Denisova individual and Neanderthals share a common history since separating from the ancestors of modern humans
Mike you hadn't heard of Denisiova until now admit your ignorance. It's the same situation, theroized admixture of humans with an extinct species. And you still remain someone who often makes up history and presents it as fact on your webiste. You tell a lot of lies and you you accuse other people of being liars. You are deeply corrupt
Posts: 43005 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Lioness and Doxie both claim to be females, do you have evidence to the contrary anguish?
I think that you do not, meaning that the above is a case of "Transference". I used to think that the anguish of your moniker was simply the anguish of being born stupid.
Now I see that it has a deeper meaning, the anguish of yearning for penetration, but not getting it.
Might I suggest hanging around after services at your local Catholic church.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
[/QB]
Printer-friendly view of this topic