posted
Bernard Montellano you're such a liar and fake . Gondor wrote
quote:
"Populations in Tanzania may have been important in the migration of modern humans from Africa to other regions, as noted in previous studies of other populations in eastern Africa (Quintana- Murci et al. 1999). For example, mtDNAs of Tanzanians belonging to haplogroup M1 cluster with peoples from Oceania, whereas Tanzanian mtDNAs belonging to haplogroup N1 and J cluster with peoples of Middle Eastern and Eurasian origin. However, the presence of haplogroups N1 and J in Tanzania suggest ''back'' migration from the Middle East or Eurasia into eastern Africa, which has been inferred from previous studies of other populations in eastern Africa (Kivisild et al. 2004). These results are intriguing and suggest that the role of Tanzanians in the migration of modern humans within and out of Africa should be analyzed in greater detail after more extensive data collection, particularly from analysis of Y-, X-, and autosomal chromosome markers. Our analyses of African mtDNAs suggest populations in eastern Africa have played an important and persistent role in the origin and diversification of modern humans.
I wrote:
quote:
mtDNA research supports an African influence in Near Oceania. For example researchers have found that the Tanzanian M1 haplogroup cluster with people from Oceania (Gonder et al, 2006).
As you can see I did not misquote anything. I repeated her claim that "Tanzanians belonging to haplogroup M1 cluster with peoples from Oceania".
You are too stupid. The paper was not about ancient mtDNA. Gondor was reporting on the M1 found in modern Tanzanians and Oceanians you ignorant moron.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: Bernard Montellano you're such a liar and fake . Gondor wrote
quote:
"Populations in Tanzania may have been important in the migration of modern humans from Africa to other regions, as noted in previous studies of other populations in eastern Africa (Quintana- Murci et al. 1999). For example, mtDNAs of Tanzanians belonging to haplogroup M1 cluster with peoples from Oceania, whereas Tanzanian mtDNAs belonging to haplogroup N1 and J cluster with peoples of Middle Eastern and Eurasian origin. However, the presence of haplogroups N1 and J in Tanzania suggest ''back'' migration from the Middle East or Eurasia into eastern Africa, which has been inferred from previous studies of other populations in eastern Africa (Kivisild et al. 2004). These results are intriguing and suggest that the role of Tanzanians in the migration of modern humans within and out of Africa should be analyzed in greater detail after more extensive data collection, particularly from analysis of Y-, X-, and autosomal chromosome markers. Our analyses of African mtDNAs suggest populations in eastern Africa have played an important and persistent role in the origin and diversification of modern humans.
I wrote:
quote:
mtDNA research supports an African influence in Near Oceania. For example researchers have found that the Tanzanian M1 haplogroup cluster with people from Oceania (Gonder et al, 2006).
As you can see I did not misquote anything. I repeated her claim that "Tanzanians belonging to haplogroup M1 cluster with peoples from Oceania".
You are too stupid. The paper was not about ancient mtDNA. Gondor was reporting on the M1 found in modern Tanzanians and Oceanians you ignorant moron.
Montellano, you are a liar and Great Deceiver.
.
The name is Gonder not Gondor. It is interesting how you immediately use ad hominem when you are caught.
The one playing the shell-game with the data is you, and as usual, you shifted the pea to obscure what we are dealing with. It is not that, in this instance, you are not quoting the words exactly (although you do that too), but that you are misusing Gonder’s data to imply that her data support your theory of a late (less than 3000 BC) migration from African/Dravidians as the founders of Melanesia. As she and I pointed out her data refers to the initial Out-of-African exodus 70,000 plus years.
quote:The Dravidians and Manding people originated in Africa. They belonged to the C-Group culture of Nubia (Winters, 2007). After 3000 BC they began to migrate out of Africa into Eurasia (Winters, 2008). The languages of Dravidian and African speakers are genetically related (Winters, 2007, 2008). The Dravidians and Africans also share genes (Winters, 2008b, 2010, 2010b). . . . . . . The transitions 16129, 16189, 16249 and 16311 are known to be recurrent in various branches of Haplogroup M, especially M1 and D4. Gonder et al., (2006) for example, noted that the mtDNAs of Tanzanians belonging to haplogroup M1 cluster with peoples from Oceania.
Here you are using Gonder’s paper as if she supported your claim—which she does not. This is academic malfeasance, and it would never get by a real peer review.
again from your paper:
quote:The intimate relations between Proto-Polynesians and Proto-Melanesians back to Shang times in China (Chang, 1964; Winters 1985, 1986), supports the hypothesis of an ancient spread of Melanesian mtDNA among (Proto-) Polynesians. Some researchers have assumed that this genetic sharing took place in Fiji (Fredlaender, 2007), but it is more probable that the sharing of Y chromosome and mtDNA types took place in mainland East Asia. This would explain the differences between shared Asian and Melanesian haplotypes and haplogroups in the Pacific.
Friedlander also objected to your comments on his paper:
RE: Skeletal Evidence of Early Polynesian and Melanesian Contact in East Asia PLoS_Genetics replied to PLoS_Genetics on 26 Feb 2008 at 13:55 GMT Originally submitted as a Reader Response by Jonathan Friedlaender (jfriedla@temple.edu) on 5 February 2008:
quote: We did find unequivocal genetic evidence of ties between Polynesians, Micronesians, and Taiwan Aborigines (as well as East Asians). Papuan-speaking groups in Island Melanesia are very distinctive, but do not seem to be especially related to Africans in spite of some similarities in appearances.
Regarding the craniometric evidence, Michael Pietrusewsky's work in Asia and the Pacific is the authoritative contemporary reference, although I believe his interpretation of Island Melanesian "intermediate" status should be altered. However, I am certain he would reject any argument that there is any evidence of recent African influence in East Asia, much less Island Melanesia.]
posted
Thanks Dr Winters and Q for bring this up. I wasn’t aware since 1999 it was confirmed that MtDNA Hg-M originated in Africa. And this was done the ‘right” way – through diversity analysis and NOT frequency. Also astonishing to me is that the variability of M1 in some Tanzania matches some populations in Oceania. Also astonishing is that bigot Torroni stated in personal communication to Murci that MtDNA M has frequency of 16% in Yemen but to this has never been proven by subsequent researchers. Torroni the bigot liar? Why do these Europeans lie so much? I don’t get it.
I speculated in several threads that there is a genetic connection on BOTH sides of the Indian Ocean. This is another study that supports this view. It seems improbably but some how AMH got across the Indian Ocean bypassing Arabia.
Also astonishing is within Tanzania some populations mtDNA haplogroups diversity cluster with Europe and Arabia while other population cluster with Indians and Oceanian’s. Man there is so much to learn, break down and post on!
-----
Genetic evidence of the early exit of homo sapiens from Africa through Eastern Africa – Murci et al 1999
Whole-mtDNA Genome Sequence Analysis of Ancient African Lineages - Mary Katherine Gonder 2006
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: [QB] Thanks Dr Winters and Q for bring this up. I wasn’t aware since 1999 it was confirmed that MtDNA Hg-M originated in Africa. And this was done the ‘right” way – through diversity analysis and NOT frequency.
That is totally false
Most sub clades of M are found outside of Africa
and there is no article stating that M has higher diversity in Africa
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Those emotional outburst do you no good!
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
More Winters' misquotations-- an old one .Winters
quote:In the Popol Vuh, the famous Mayan historian Ixtlilxochitl, the Olmecs came to Mexico in "ships of barks"(probably a reference to papyrus boats or dug-out canoes used by the Proto-Saharans) and landed in Potonchan, which they commenced to populate.Mexican traditions claim that these migrates from the east were led by Amoxaque or Bookmen. The term Amoxaque, is similar to the Manding 'a ma n'kye':"he (is) a teacher". These Blacks are frequently seen >in Mayan writings as gods or merchants.
Quetzalcoatl
Total baloney. 1) This shows that Winters knows nothing about Mesoamerica and the written sources and makes elementary mistakes that I would fail my students in their first course on Mesoamerica for committing. Anyone who knows anything about Mesoamerica would know, at a glance, that Ixtlilxochitl IS NOT A MAYA NAME BUT A NAME IN NAHUATL. Fernando de Alva Ixtlilxochitl, a Texcocan 17th century historian (1578-1650) had nothing whatever to do with the Popol Vuh a Guatemalan Quiche mythological work from an unknown author. So much for Winters' control of the literature.
2) Just like other Afrocentrists (and Scientific Creationists) one cannot trust Winters’ quotations or paraphrases of sources. Words are added in and interpretations made that appear to support the pre-conceived thesis. In this case Ixtlilxochitl SAYS NOTHING ABOUT “SHIPS OF BARKS”. The relevant quote from F. De Alva Ixtlilxochitl. 1975 [1608]] Obras Historicas ed. E. O’Gorman, vol. 2: 7-8. Mexico: UNAM.
[In a passage dealing not with history but with the origin myths of the Aztecs, NOTICE NOT THE MAYAS, including the previous 4 creations and destructions of the earth].
quote:Those that possessed the new world in this third creation were the Olmecs and Xicalancas. According to the stories there are they came in ships or boats from the East to the land of Potonchan. Which they began to people. And on the shores of the Atoyac river which passes between the city of the Angels [the colonial city of Puebla] and Cholula [b(]this is near Mexico City not the Maya area[)/b] they met some of the giants who had escaped the catastrophe and extinction of the second creation of the earth. These giants being strong and trusting in their strength and size of body lorded it over the newcomers, in such a fashion that they oppressed them as if they were slaves . . .
3) This passage in Ixtlilxochitl says nothing about the “amoxaque” WHICH IS NOT ANY KIND OF MAYA BUT NAHUATL.This term is found in Sahagun’s Florentine Codex. Winters is using Van Sertima or perhaps Wiener with his usual twist. Van Sertima argued that amoxaque really came from Egyptian [funny how pliable and flexible Nahuatl is- it resembles whatever language the current diffusionist needs (Shang Chinese, Egyptian, Mande, Phoenician, Latin, Welsh, etc.), whereas Winters says it is Mande. Both are full of baloney. To begin with 1) neither Van Sertima nor Winters knows enough to see that the word which they copied from the Spanish version not the Nahuatl version of the Florentine codex is misspelled; 2) Neither Van Sertima nor Winters knows that Nahuatl is an agglutinative language that elides letters so that the word they want to derive from either Egyptian or Mande is composed of AMOXTLI (“books”- HUA (possessive) QUE (plural form) to form AMOXHUAQUE pronounced /amoshwaque/ which has zero resemblance to Winters’ “so called” Mande which would need to be verified in any case given the track record we have seen already.
Posts: 833 | From: Austin, TX | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic