the part of the chart does not include R-M207 the basal R that is the ancestor of R1 and R2 which would be above this section
It also doesn't show the R2 phylogeny which would be at left of this section
Anyway we can see as M343 descends it splits into P297 (something Clyde never mentions) and R-V88
If we look at the descendants of P297 we see M269 at left and at right various clades in red lines M478 , Y13200 and other clades represented by the red lines but unnumbered These clades are not descendants of M269, They are siblings part of a split from P297.
Downstream of M269 is R1b1'9 and R1b11 and various subclades
Now going to the far right of the chart the black line is V88. It has some subclades but none are shown.
The red lines at the right are siblings of V88 but are not descendants of V88. Those are early hunter gatherers (H) and farmers (F) in Europe
So anything on a horizontal line are siblings the parent is the straight line above the horizontal line. In this case M343
The ancestor to all of this is in Eurasia somewhere R* One place possible is Siberia because they found very old remains there carrying R*
Anyway what happened is people from that population went their separate ways into Central Asia, Europe and Africa
and in those places mutated into various different subclades
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
There are two ways Haplogroup R, exist among whites . Firstly, the Khoisan introduced the R haplogroup 24kya to Eurasia. The Ice Age, came to Europe and many Khoisan fled into the caves , became depigmented and evolved into the white race. These whites left the caves after 2000 BC, in Central Asia, and began to expand into the rest of Europe and the Egyptian Delta after 1200 BC, carrying y-chromosome R.
The Southern whites who live in the Levant and Central Asia are descendants of the Gutians. They usually do not carry haplogroup R. Abu-Amero,KK, Hellani A, Gonzalez AN, Larruga JM, Cabrera VM, Underhill, PA. 2009. BMC Genetics, 10:59 doi:10.1186/1471-2156-10-59. Retrieved 04/30/2010 at: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2156/10/59 , claims that in Asia the frequency of haplotype M173 is as follows: Anatolia 0.19%, Iran 2.67%, Iraq 0.49% Oman 1.0%, Pakistan 0.57% and Oman 1.0% . This contrast sharply with the widespread distribution of R-V88 in Africa, that ranges between 7-95% and averages 39% ; but no trace of Eurasiatic maternal lineages in West Central Africa.
The second way , haplogroup R entered Eurasia was the migration of the Kushites and Moors from Africa into Europe after 3000 BC. The Kushites carrying R1, expanded across Eurasia from Iran. One group took R1b into Europe while the Dravidians mainly spread R1a in Central and South Asia.
Gutian whites who lived in Middle Asia (the Levant and Central Asia), and the Caucasians who originated in the caves, who early settled Europe mated with the Kushites, and due to the large number of Black Europeans carrying R haplogroup--some of these whites carry the R haplogroup today.
Y-Chromosome R1-M173 was probably spread in Western Europe first by African Roman soldiers, and later by African Muslims when they conquered Western Europe as Moors. This would explain why 60-70% French and Spanish males carry this y-haplogroup. The R1 haplogroup originated in Africa.
.
.
. The phylogeography of R1 in Africa makes it clear that this y-chromosome is spread globally across Africa and includes the genetic structure of diverse African populations including Berber, Chadic, Cushitic, Khoisan,Pygmy, Niger-Congo, Nilo-Saharan and Semitic speaking African populations (Berniell-Lee et al, 2009; Cruciani et al, 2010; Wood et al, 2009). The fact that Dravidians carry the R haplogroup illustrate the recent introduction of R y-chromosome to Eurasia.
In fact recent research on y-haplogroups in Africa suggest that R1-M269 is also widespread in Africa.
Above is a figure from Gonzalez et al. The Gonzalez et al article found that 10 out of 19 subjects in the study carried R1b1-P25 or M269. This is highly significant because it indicates that 53% of the R1 carriers in this study were M269, this finding is further proof of the widespread nature of this so-called Eurasian genes in Africa among populations that have not mated with Europeans.
Abu-Amero et al (20009) reveal the fact that Dravidians carry the R haplogroups illustrate the recent introduction of Ry-chromosomes to Eurasia. The frequency of haplotype M173 in Eurasia is as follows: Anatolia 0.19%, Iran 2.67%, Iraq 0.49% Oman 1.0%, Pakistan 0.57% and Oman 1.0% . This contrast sharply with the widespread distribution of R1 in Africa that ranges between 7- 95% in various parts of Africa, especially Cameroon (Coia et al, 2005). Coia et al (2005) has revealed that no maternal Eurasian lineages have been found among Sub-Saharan Africans with a R1- M173 profile. Haplogroup V88 has the greatest frequency in Africa. It is predominately carried by Chadic speakers, ranges between 2-60% among Central African Niger-Congo speakers (Cruciani et al, 2010). Researchers have found that the TMRCA of V88 was 9200-5600 kya (Cruciani et al, 2010).
The vast majority of Africans belong to the y-chromosome E macrohaplogroup. Phylogenetically haplogroup R1b is mainly found in West Africa and the Sahel.
In this region the frequency of R-M173 can range between 85-100% among some Niger Congo speakers in Cameroon (Cruciani et al, 2010). The paternal record of M173 on the African continent illustrates a greater distribution of this y-chromosome among varied African populations than, in Asia.
The greatest diversity of R1b in Africa is highly suggestive of an Africa origin for this male lineage because it is not isolated to just one part of Africa.
Archaeological (Lal, 1963), genetic (Winters, 2008;2010a), placenames (Balakrishnan, 2005) and linguistic data group (Aravanan,1979,1980; Upadhyaya, 1976,1979; Winters 1985a,1985b, 1989) linking Africans and Dravidian support the recent demic diffusion of SubSaharan Africans and gene flow from Africa to Eurasia. An early colonization of Eurasia 4kya by Sub-Saharan Africans and Dravidian carriers of R1-M173 is the best scenario to explain the high frequency and widespread geographical distribution of this y-chromosome on the African continent (Winters, 2010c). Given the greatest diversity of R1- M173, this is the most parsimonious model explaining the frequency of R-M173 in Africa.
Africans carry haplogroup R1a.
In India the Dravidian people carry the R1a haplogroup The Dravidian people of India originally lived in Middle Africa and belonged to the Proto-Saharan Civilization. The Proto-Saharan civilization was situated in the Proto-Sahara, which includes Cameroon. . . In Cameroon we find carriers of R1a. In addition to carriers of R1a in Cameroon; the Dravidian languages are still spoken today in Cameroon see:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWyAYGlFZjkhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWyAYGlFZjk
In conclusion, the R macrohaplogroup probably originated in Africa. In my paper POSSIBLE AFRICAN ORIGIN OF Y-CHROMOSOME R1-M173 , I argue that the P clade originated in Africa because 1) the age of R-V88 and 2) the widespread nature of R1 in Africa.
The TMRCA of V88 was 9200 (Cruciani et al, 2010). Kivisild et al 2017 appears to date V88 to around 18,000 kya according to Figure 7.Toomas Kivisild (2017).The study of human Y chromosome variation through ancient DNA. web page
The article is interesting. It is most interesting because it places V88 in ancient Europe. Kivisild (2017) also made it clear that V88 is the earliest offshoot of R-M343 .
.
Kivisild (2017) claimed the V88 samples from Samara and Spain was in Haak et al 2015. Kivisild (2017) wrote:"Interestingly, the earliest offshoot of extant haplogroup R1b-M343 variation, the V88 subclade, which is currently most common in Fulani speaking populations in Africa (Cruciani et al. 2010) has distant relatives in Early Neolithic samples from across wide geographic area from Iberia, Germany to Samara (Fig. 7)." .
Kivisild (2017) made it clear that the Samara and Spanish samples were different from other aDNA samples. Kivisild (2017) wrote: "Late Neolithic, Early Bronze Age and Iron Age samples from Central and Western Europe have typically the R1b-L11, R1a1-Z283 and R1a-M417 (xZ645) affiliation while the samples from the Yamnaya and Samara neighbourhood are different and belong to sub-clades R1b11-Z2105 and R1a2-Z93 (Allentoft et al. 2015; Cassidy et al. 2016; Haak et al. 2015; Mathieson et al. 2015; Schiffels et al. 2016)."
As you can see Haak et al (2015) is cited as a source. In Haak et al(2017) Table S4.2, these samples were identified as R1b1.
Up to 2010, R1b1 was recognized as an African genome. Africans carried R1b1, the name for this haplogroup was changed to R-L278. In 2010, R-V88 was originally named R1b1a and ; R-V8, was named R1b1a2. Today R-V88 is named R1b1a2, and R1b1a is renamed R-L754.
. Haak et al (2015) had only two samples from Samara and Spain, i.e., named R1b1. The R1b1 samples can be the only representation of V88 from Samara and Spain, cited by Kivisild (2017).
In Africa we find R-M269 and V88. Clearly, R-V88 is older than R-M269 there is no evidence of archaeological evidence of a back migration or haplogroup R into Africa, but there is evidence of the migration of the Kushites and Proto-Saharans into Eurasia from Middle Africa. This supports the proposition the R haplogroups originated in Africa, not Eurasia.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
the part of the chart does not include R-M207 the basal R that is the ancestor of R1 and R2 which would be above this section
It also doesn't show the R2 phylogeny which would be at left of this section
Anyway we can see as M343 descends it splits into P297 (something Clyde never mentions) and R-V88
If we look at the descendants of P297 we see M269 at left and at right various clades in red lines M478 , Y13200 and other clades represented by the red lines but unnumbered These clades are not descendants of M269, They are siblings part of a split from P297.
Downstream of M269 is R1b1'9 and R1b11 and various subclades
Now going to the far right of the chart the black line is V88. It has some subclades but none are shown.
The red lines at the right are siblings of V88 but are not descendants of V88. Those are early hunter gatherers (H) and farmers (F) in Europe
So anything on a horizontal line are siblings the parent is the straight line above the horizontal line. In this case M343
The ancestor to all of this is in Eurasia somewhere R* One place possible is Siberia because they found very old remains there carrying R*
Anyway what happened is people from that population went their separate ways into Central Asia, Europe and Africa
and in those places mutated into various different subclades
R1b1 was recognized as an African genome. Africans carry R1b1, the name for this haplogroup was changed to R-L278. ,
Kivisild chart is a lie.Look at ISOGG 2016 here it is made clear that R1b1 is upstream of M269, not downstream to R1b-M269. R1b-M269=R1b1a1a2, this is downstream to R1b1.
This Figure by Kivisild, illustrates how Eurocentrist have no limit to their blatant and stealthily rewriting of history to "whiteout" Black and African people. The aDNA of the CHG and EF of Europe is R1b1a2. Although ISOGG 2016 makes it clear this haplogroup is V88, in the research literature they are referring to this clade (R1b1a2) as R1b-P312/M269 , eventhough M269 is R1b1a1a2.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the questioner: clyde winters i hope you did not forget about my question
which kushite people are you referring to that brought R1b to Europe?
Both the Eastern and Western Kushites. It was first introduced by the Khoisan, probably during the Salutrean period.
please be more specific
who are the eastern and western kushites?
how come the Khoisan did not introduce haplogroups A and B to the same extent they supposedly introduce R1b?
Researchers have analyzed the DNA of only a few of the ancient Negro skeletons out of the hundreds recovered from different periods in Europe so we may find news of skeletons that do carry these genes.
Up until recently researchers were mainly interested in the presence of mtDNA haplogroup N, in Europe. Now researchers are attempting to promote the idea that the Bell Beaker, Yamnaya and etc., were Indo-Europeans so they are concentrating on Neolithic and Bronze Age samples that support this myth.These skeletons are of Negroes not contemporary whites, who only entered Europe after 1400BC.
As a result, if haplogroups A and B, are found in ancient samples they would be seen as outliners and not reported.
The Western kushites were the Ounanian hunter-gathers who early migrated to Iberia between 10-8kya.
The Eastern Kushites include the Ounanian-Harifians who migrated in the Levant/Anatolian who were later known as Hatti, Kaska, and other tribes that took farming and cattle rearing into the caucasus and Steppes.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
The Western kushites were the Ounanian hunter-gathers who early migrated to Iberia between 10-8kya.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
there is 100 years of archaeological research that places the origin of Iberian cultures in Africa from 44k BC to 1492 AD. 1492 was when the Moors were forced from Iberia.
quote:Originally posted by the questioner: clyde winters i hope you did not forget about my question
which kushite people are you referring to that brought R1b to Europe?
Both the Eastern and Western Kushites. It was first introduced by the Khoisan, probably during the Salutrean period.
please be more specific
who are the eastern and western kushites?
how come the Khoisan did not introduce haplogroups A and B to the same extent they supposedly introduce R1b?
Researchers have analyzed the DNA of only a few of the ancient Negro skeletons out of the hundreds recovered from different periods in Europe so we may find news of skeletons that do carry these genes.
Up until recently researchers were mainly interested in the presence of mtDNA haplogroup N, in Europe. Now researchers are attempting to promote the idea that the Bell Beaker, Yamnaya and etc., were Indo-Europeans so they are concentrating on Neolithic and Bronze Age samples that support this myth.These skeletons are of Negroes not contemporary whites, who only entered Europe after 1400BC.
As a result, if haplogroups A and B, are found in ancient samples they would be seen as outliners and not reported.
The Western kushites were the Ounanian hunter-gathers who early migrated to Iberia between 10-8kya.
The Eastern Kushites include the Ounanian-Harifians who migrated in the Levant/Anatolian who were later known as Hatti, Kaska, and other tribes that took farming and cattle rearing into the caucasus and Steppes.
Do you have any evidence that the Ounanian hunter-gathers carried R1b?
and why do you call them Kushites instead of Ounanian hunter-gathers?
quote:Originally posted by the questioner: clyde winters i hope you did not forget about my question
which kushite people are you referring to that brought R1b to Europe?
Both the Eastern and Western Kushites. It was first introduced by the Khoisan, probably during the Salutrean period.
please be more specific
who are the eastern and western kushites?
how come the Khoisan did not introduce haplogroups A and B to the same extent they supposedly introduce R1b?
Researchers have analyzed the DNA of only a few of the ancient Negro skeletons out of the hundreds recovered from different periods in Europe so we may find news of skeletons that do carry these genes.
Up until recently researchers were mainly interested in the presence of mtDNA haplogroup N, in Europe. Now researchers are attempting to promote the idea that the Bell Beaker, Yamnaya and etc., were Indo-Europeans so they are concentrating on Neolithic and Bronze Age samples that support this myth.These skeletons are of Negroes not contemporary whites, who only entered Europe after 1400BC.
As a result, if haplogroups A and B, are found in ancient samples they would be seen as outliners and not reported.
The Western kushites were the Ounanian hunter-gathers who early migrated to Iberia between 10-8kya.
The Eastern Kushites include the Ounanian-Harifians who migrated in the Levant/Anatolian who were later known as Hatti, Kaska, and other tribes that took farming and cattle rearing into the caucasus and Steppes.
Do you have any evidence that the Ounanian hunter-gathers carried R1b?
and why do you call them Kushites instead of Ounanian hunter-gathers?
I call them Kushites because this was the final culture founded by the descendants of the Ounanians and the name they called themselves.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the questioner: clyde winters i hope you did not forget about my question
which kushite people are you referring to that brought R1b to Europe?
Both the Eastern and Western Kushites. It was first introduced by the Khoisan, probably during the Salutrean period.
please be more specific
who are the eastern and western kushites?
how come the Khoisan did not introduce haplogroups A and B to the same extent they supposedly introduce R1b?
Researchers have analyzed the DNA of only a few of the ancient Negro skeletons out of the hundreds recovered from different periods in Europe so we may find news of skeletons that do carry these genes.
Up until recently researchers were mainly interested in the presence of mtDNA haplogroup N, in Europe. Now researchers are attempting to promote the idea that the Bell Beaker, Yamnaya and etc., were Indo-Europeans so they are concentrating on Neolithic and Bronze Age samples that support this myth.These skeletons are of Negroes not contemporary whites, who only entered Europe after 1400BC.
As a result, if haplogroups A and B, are found in ancient samples they would be seen as outliners and not reported.
The Western kushites were the Ounanian hunter-gathers who early migrated to Iberia between 10-8kya.
The Eastern Kushites include the Ounanian-Harifians who migrated in the Levant/Anatolian who were later known as Hatti, Kaska, and other tribes that took farming and cattle rearing into the caucasus and Steppes.
Do you have any evidence that the Ounanian hunter-gathers carried R1b?
and why do you call them Kushites instead of Ounanian hunter-gathers?
I call them Kushites because this was the final culture founded by the descendants of the Ounanians and the name they called themselves.
How do you know the Ounanians called themselves Kushites?
what evidence do you have that Ounanians carried R1b?
posted
We know the Ounanians were archers.The Kushites were known in history as great archers. Plus, the people of the Lavant, and Anatolia referred to themselves as Kushites, as I discussed earlier.
We know the Kushites carried R1 due to the discovery that Tutankhamen carried R1b . Plus the Kushite haplogroups in Crete and Anatolia include R1b.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: We know the Ounanians were archers.The Kushites were known in history as great archers. Plus, the people of the Lavant, and Anatolia referred to themselves as Kushites, as I discussed earlier.
We know the Kushites carried R1 due to the discovery that Tutankhamen carried R1b . Plus the Kushite haplogroups in Crete and Anatolia include R1b.
there are archers in many cultures around the world so that is not unique to the kushites
where is your source that the Levant and Anatolia referred to themselves as kushites?
Tutankhamen's body is too decayed to tell what haplogroup he comes from, the only R1b dna that they got from his mummy is from his white handlers
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: We know the Ounanians were archers.The Kushites were known in history as great archers. Plus, the people of the Lavant, and Anatolia referred to themselves as Kushites, as I discussed earlier.
We know the Kushites carried R1 due to the discovery that Tutankhamen carried R1b . Plus the Kushite haplogroups in Crete and Anatolia include R1b.
there are archers in many cultures around the world so that is not unique to the kushites
where is your source that the Levant and Anatolia referred to themselves as kushites?
Tutankhamen's body is too decayed to tell what haplogroup he comes from, the only R1b dna that they got from his mummy is from his white handlers
besides Tutankhamen was not a kushite
Tutankhamen was not a Kushite but it shows that Africans were carrying R1 in ancient times.
The kushites lived in the Sudan, North Africa and Levant/Anatolia.
Around 800 BC, Homer mentions the Aethiopians, or Kushites, in the Iliad and the Odyssey. Homer said that the Kushites were “the most just of men, the favorites of the Gods”.
To the Greco-Romans there were two Kush empires, one in Africa and the other in Asia. Homer alluded to the two Kushite empires when he wrote in the Odyssey i.23: “a race divided, whom the sloping rays; the rising and the setting sun surveys”. In the Iliad. i.423, Homer wrote that Zeus went to Kush to banquet with the blameless Ethiopians.
In 64 BC, the Greek geographer and historian Strabo stated in Chapter 1 of Geography that there were two Kush empires - one in Asia and another in Africa. In addition to Kush in Nubia and Upper Egypt, some Greco-Roman authors considered their presence in southern Phoenicia up to Mount Amanus in Syria.
The Neolithic process in North Africa was done by Africans, who took the Agro-Pastoral cultures to the Levant and Europe (4).
Niger-Congo Speakers probably played an important role in the peopling of the Sahara. Drake et al make it clear there was considerable human activity in the Sahara before it became a desert[1]. Drake et al [1] provides evidence that the original settlers of this wet Sahara, who used aquatic tool kits, were Nilo-Saharan (NS) speakers. The authors also recognized another Saharan culture that played a role in the peopling of the desert. This population hunted animals with the bow-and –arrow; they are associated with the Ounanian culture. The Ounanian culture existed 12kya [3].
The IAM people [Early Neolithic Moroccans] (5), were nothing more than hunter-gatherer Kushites that had originally belonged to the Ounanian Culture (3-4). The Ounanians, like their Kushite descendants were great archers and based their civilization on hunting using the bow, and limited cattle domestication (3-4).
The Ounanian culture was first described by Breuil in 1930 at Ounan to the south of Taodeni in northern Mali. Ounanian Points are suggested to be the hallmark of the some Epipaleolithic industries in the central Sahara, the Sahel and northern Sudan, and dated to the early Holocene.
The Ounanian culture is associated with sites in central Egypt, Algeria, Mali, Mauretania and Niger [3-4]. The Ounanian tradition is probably associated with the Niger-Congo phyla. This would explain the close relationship between the Niger-Congo and Nilo-Saharan languages[3].
The original homeland of the Niger-Congo speakers was probably situated in the Saharan Highlands during the Ounanian period. From here NC populations migrated into the Fezzan, Nile Valley and Sudan as their original homeland became more and more arid.
In the Eastern Sahara many individual types of tanged and shouldered arrowheads occur on early Holocene prehistoric sites along with Green Saharan/Wavy-line pottery (1-2) . 'Saharo-Sudanese Neolithic' wavy-line, dotted wavy line and walking-comb pottery was used from Lake Turkana to Nabta Playa, in Tibestim , Mauritania, on into in the Hoggar, in Niger. This pottery evolved into the Beaker Bell ceramics.
Wavy-line pottery
The Ounanian culture was not isolated in Africa. It was spread into the Levant. As a result, we have in the archaeological literature the name Ounan-Harif point. This name was proposed for the tanged points at Nabta Playa and Bir Kiseiba .
Tanged Point
Harifian is a specialized regional cultural development of the Epipalaeolithic of the Negev Desert. Harifian has close connections with the late Mesolithic cultures of Fayyum and the Eastern Deserts of Egypt, whose tool assemblage resembles that of the Harifian.
The tangled Ounanian points are also found at Foum Arguin . These points were used from Oued Draa, in southern Morocco, to the Banc d’Arguin and from the Atlantic shore to the lowlands of northwestern Sahara in Mauritania . We now have DNA from Ounanian sites in Morocco.
All the burials in Ifri n’Amr o’Moussa site IAM1-IAM7 , are devoid of any artifacts, except for an original funeral ritual, which consists of placing a millstone on the skull (5) . These burials were dated from 4,850 to 5,250 BCE, they carried U6, M1, T2, X and K (5). This suggest that Africans were already carrying this mtDNA. The spread of the Ounanians to Harif in the Levant explains the presence of these Kushite clades in the Levant and Anatolia.
In summary, the Niger-Congo speakers or Kushites formerly lived in the highland regions of the Fezzan and Hoggar until after 4000 BC. The ancestors of the Kushites were the Ounanians who spread the Ounan-Harfian toolkit, pottery and arrows from throughout North Africa, into Iberia and the Levant. Originally hunter-gatherers the Proto-Niger- Congo people developed an agro-pastoral economy which included the cultivation of millet, and domestication of cattle (and sheep). It was these Kushites who introduced mtDNA U6, M1, T2, X and K; and Y-Chromosome R1b into Eurasian from their African homeland in the Sahel-Sahara.
Eurocentrists attempt to limit the extent of the Kushite empire. The Weni inscription makes it clear that many states were inhabited by the ḫ3st, or Kushites.
.
.
. The map above makes it appear that only Irthet was Kush, but the Weni inscriptions includes Wawat, Yam and Temeh as being inhabited by Kushite = ḫ3st.
quote:
The inscription of Weni reads:
“His majesty made war on the Asiatic Sand-dwellers and his majesty made an army of many ten thousands; in the entire South, southward to Elephantine, and northward to Aphroditopolis [Busiris]; in the Northland on both sides entire in the [stronghold], and in the midst of the [strongholds], among the Irthet khas [Kusites], the Mazoi khas [Kushites], the Yam khas [Kushites], among the Wawat Khas [Kushites], among the Kau khas [Kushites], and in the land of Temeh.”
In the Weni inscription we can clearly see that Kushites were living in Upper and Lower Egypt. The final comment in the Weni inscription made it clear that ḫ3st (khas=Kushites) were also “in the land of Temeh”. On this map, Temeh is situated to the south of Irthet, but in Egyptian Temeh, meant Lower Egypt.
The Egyptians made it clear that LOWER EGYPT was called : TAMEH , and UPPER EGYPT : TA SHEMA .
Because the ḫ3st (khas = Kushites), were living in Lower Egypt, when the Kings of Heqa ḫ3st took control of Egypt during the Hyksos period they were returning to the lands of their ancestors as Heqa ḫ3st (khas= Kushites) (Kings of the Kushites).
The khas [Kushites ] belonged to the C-Group people and lived in Upper and Lower Egypt between 3700-1300 BC and were called Tmhw (Temehus). The Temehus were organized into two groups: the Thnw (Tehenu) in the North and the Nhsj (Nehesy) in the South.
Sahure referred to the Tehenu leader as “Hati Tehenu”. The name Hati corresponds to the name Hatti - a tribe in Anatolia. However, the Hatti people often referred to themselves as Kashkas. Kashkas corresponds to ḫ3st (Khas), and the Hyksos were identifying their ethnic origins when they called themselves ḫ3st . References: 1. Nick A. Drake, Roger M. Blench, Simon J. Armitage, Charlie S. Bristow, and Kevin H. White. (2010). Ancient watercourses and biogeography of the Sahara explain the peopling of the desert PNAS 2011 108 (2) 458-462; published ahead of print December 27,2010, doi:10.1073/pnas.1012231108 2. Vernet R, Ott M, Tarrou L, Gallin A, Géoris-Creuseveau J. (2007) Excavation of the mound of FA 10 (Banc d'Arguin) and its contribution to the knowledge of the culture paleolithical Foum Arguin, northwestern Sahara (Translated from French) J Afr Archaeol 5:17–46. 3. Winters C. (2012). Origin of the Niger-Congo Speakers. WebmedCentral GENETICS 2012;3(3). https://www.webmedcentral.com/article_view/3149 4. Winters, C. (2017)A GENETIC CHRONOLOGY OF AFRICAN Y-CHROMOSOMES R-V88 AND R-M269 IN AFRICA AND EURASIA,http://www.cibtech.org/J-LIFE-SCIENCES/PUBLICATIONS/2017/VOL-7-NO-2/04-JLS-004-WINTERS-A-EURASIA.pdf 5. Fregel R, et al (2017). Neolithization of North Africa involved the migration of people from both the Levant and Europe. bioRxiv 191569; doi: https://doi.org
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Tutankhamen's body is too decayed to tell what haplogroup he comes from, the only R1b dna that they got from his mummy is from his white handlers
why are you saying R1b was gotten from Tutankhamen ?
Do you not understand what i typed?
king tut's handlers carry R1b not tut
it is near impossible to abstract Dna from a body that decayed thousands of years ago. king tuts body is surrounded by people of European descent thus causing a risk of contaminating the mummy with their Dna
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: We know the Ounanians were archers.The Kushites were known in history as great archers. Plus, the people of the Lavant, and Anatolia referred to themselves as Kushites, as I discussed earlier.
We know the Kushites carried R1 due to the discovery that Tutankhamen carried R1b . Plus the Kushite haplogroups in Crete and Anatolia include R1b.
there are archers in many cultures around the world so that is not unique to the kushites
where is your source that the Levant and Anatolia referred to themselves as kushites?
Tutankhamen's body is too decayed to tell what haplogroup he comes from, the only R1b dna that they got from his mummy is from his white handlers
besides Tutankhamen was not a kushite
Tutankhamen was not a Kushite but it shows that Africans were carrying R1 in ancient times.
The kushites lived in the Sudan, North Africa and Levant/Anatolia.
Around 800 BC, Homer mentions the Aethiopians, or Kushites, in the Iliad and the Odyssey. Homer said that the Kushites were “the most just of men, the favorites of the Gods”.
To the Greco-Romans there were two Kush empires, one in Africa and the other in Asia. Homer alluded to the two Kushite empires when he wrote in the Odyssey i.23: “a race divided, whom the sloping rays; the rising and the setting sun surveys”. In the Iliad. i.423, Homer wrote that Zeus went to Kush to banquet with the blameless Ethiopians.
In 64 BC, the Greek geographer and historian Strabo stated in Chapter 1 of Geography that there were two Kush empires - one in Asia and another in Africa. In addition to Kush in Nubia and Upper Egypt, some Greco-Roman authors considered their presence in southern Phoenicia up to Mount Amanus in Syria.
The Neolithic process in North Africa was done by Africans, who took the Agro-Pastoral cultures to the Levant and Europe (4).
Niger-Congo Speakers probably played an important role in the peopling of the Sahara. Drake et al make it clear there was considerable human activity in the Sahara before it became a desert[1]. Drake et al [1] provides evidence that the original settlers of this wet Sahara, who used aquatic tool kits, were Nilo-Saharan (NS) speakers. The authors also recognized another Saharan culture that played a role in the peopling of the desert. This population hunted animals with the bow-and –arrow; they are associated with the Ounanian culture. The Ounanian culture existed 12kya [3].
The IAM people [Early Neolithic Moroccans] (5), were nothing more than hunter-gatherer Kushites that had originally belonged to the Ounanian Culture (3-4). The Ounanians, like their Kushite descendants were great archers and based their civilization on hunting using the bow, and limited cattle domestication (3-4).
The Ounanian culture was first described by Breuil in 1930 at Ounan to the south of Taodeni in northern Mali. Ounanian Points are suggested to be the hallmark of the some Epipaleolithic industries in the central Sahara, the Sahel and northern Sudan, and dated to the early Holocene.
The Ounanian culture is associated with sites in central Egypt, Algeria, Mali, Mauretania and Niger [3-4]. The Ounanian tradition is probably associated with the Niger-Congo phyla. This would explain the close relationship between the Niger-Congo and Nilo-Saharan languages[3].
The original homeland of the Niger-Congo speakers was probably situated in the Saharan Highlands during the Ounanian period. From here NC populations migrated into the Fezzan, Nile Valley and Sudan as their original homeland became more and more arid.
In the Eastern Sahara many individual types of tanged and shouldered arrowheads occur on early Holocene prehistoric sites along with Green Saharan/Wavy-line pottery (1-2) . 'Saharo-Sudanese Neolithic' wavy-line, dotted wavy line and walking-comb pottery was used from Lake Turkana to Nabta Playa, in Tibestim , Mauritania, on into in the Hoggar, in Niger. This pottery evolved into the Beaker Bell ceramics.
Wavy-line pottery
The Ounanian culture was not isolated in Africa. It was spread into the Levant. As a result, we have in the archaeological literature the name Ounan-Harif point. This name was proposed for the tanged points at Nabta Playa and Bir Kiseiba .
Tanged Point
Harifian is a specialized regional cultural development of the Epipalaeolithic of the Negev Desert. Harifian has close connections with the late Mesolithic cultures of Fayyum and the Eastern Deserts of Egypt, whose tool assemblage resembles that of the Harifian.
The tangled Ounanian points are also found at Foum Arguin . These points were used from Oued Draa, in southern Morocco, to the Banc d’Arguin and from the Atlantic shore to the lowlands of northwestern Sahara in Mauritania . We now have DNA from Ounanian sites in Morocco.
All the burials in Ifri n’Amr o’Moussa site IAM1-IAM7 , are devoid of any artifacts, except for an original funeral ritual, which consists of placing a millstone on the skull (5) . These burials were dated from 4,850 to 5,250 BCE, they carried U6, M1, T2, X and K (5). This suggest that Africans were already carrying this mtDNA. The spread of the Ounanians to Harif in the Levant explains the presence of these Kushite clades in the Levant and Anatolia.
In summary, the Niger-Congo speakers or Kushites formerly lived in the highland regions of the Fezzan and Hoggar until after 4000 BC. The ancestors of the Kushites were the Ounanians who spread the Ounan-Harfian toolkit, pottery and arrows from throughout North Africa, into Iberia and the Levant. Originally hunter-gatherers the Proto-Niger- Congo people developed an agro-pastoral economy which included the cultivation of millet, and domestication of cattle (and sheep). It was these Kushites who introduced mtDNA U6, M1, T2, X and K; and Y-Chromosome R1b into Eurasian from their African homeland in the Sahel-Sahara.
Eurocentrists attempt to limit the extent of the Kushite empire. The Weni inscription makes it clear that many states were inhabited by the ḫ3st, or Kushites.
.
.
. The map above makes it appear that only Irthet was Kush, but the Weni inscriptions includes Wawat, Yam and Temeh as being inhabited by Kushite = ḫ3st.
quote:
The inscription of Weni reads:
“His majesty made war on the Asiatic Sand-dwellers and his majesty made an army of many ten thousands; in the entire South, southward to Elephantine, and northward to Aphroditopolis [Busiris]; in the Northland on both sides entire in the [stronghold], and in the midst of the [strongholds], among the Irthet khas [Kusites], the Mazoi khas [Kushites], the Yam khas [Kushites], among the Wawat Khas [Kushites], among the Kau khas [Kushites], and in the land of Temeh.”
In the Weni inscription we can clearly see that Kushites were living in Upper and Lower Egypt. The final comment in the Weni inscription made it clear that ḫ3st (khas=Kushites) were also “in the land of Temeh”. On this map, Temeh is situated to the south of Irthet, but in Egyptian Temeh, meant Lower Egypt.
The Egyptians made it clear that LOWER EGYPT was called : TAMEH , and UPPER EGYPT : TA SHEMA .
Because the ḫ3st (khas = Kushites), were living in Lower Egypt, when the Kings of Heqa ḫ3st took control of Egypt during the Hyksos period they were returning to the lands of their ancestors as Heqa ḫ3st (khas= Kushites) (Kings of the Kushites).
The khas [Kushites ] belonged to the C-Group people and lived in Upper and Lower Egypt between 3700-1300 BC and were called Tmhw (Temehus). The Temehus were organized into two groups: the Thnw (Tehenu) in the North and the Nhsj (Nehesy) in the South.
Sahure referred to the Tehenu leader as “Hati Tehenu”. The name Hati corresponds to the name Hatti - a tribe in Anatolia. However, the Hatti people often referred to themselves as Kashkas. Kashkas corresponds to ḫ3st (Khas), and the Hyksos were identifying their ethnic origins when they called themselves ḫ3st . References: 1. Nick A. Drake, Roger M. Blench, Simon J. Armitage, Charlie S. Bristow, and Kevin H. White. (2010). Ancient watercourses and biogeography of the Sahara explain the peopling of the desert PNAS 2011 108 (2) 458-462; published ahead of print December 27,2010, doi:10.1073/pnas.1012231108 2. Vernet R, Ott M, Tarrou L, Gallin A, Géoris-Creuseveau J. (2007) Excavation of the mound of FA 10 (Banc d'Arguin) and its contribution to the knowledge of the culture paleolithical Foum Arguin, northwestern Sahara (Translated from French) J Afr Archaeol 5:17–46. 3. Winters C. (2012). Origin of the Niger-Congo Speakers. WebmedCentral GENETICS 2012;3(3). https://www.webmedcentral.com/article_view/3149 4. Winters, C. (2017)A GENETIC CHRONOLOGY OF AFRICAN Y-CHROMOSOMES R-V88 AND R-M269 IN AFRICA AND EURASIA,http://www.cibtech.org/J-LIFE-SCIENCES/PUBLICATIONS/2017/VOL-7-NO-2/04-JLS-004-WINTERS-A-EURASIA.pdf 5. Fregel R, et al (2017). Neolithization of North Africa involved the migration of people from both the Levant and Europe. bioRxiv 191569; doi: https://doi.org
It is almost impossible to know if king tut carried R1b in ancient times
Strabo, Homer or any other Greek writer in ancient times did not use the word kush or kushite
you still have not shown the Ounanians carrying R1b
the only evidence of R1b in Africa are the Hausa and they claim descent from northern people
quote:Originally posted by the questioner: It is almost impossible to know if king tut carried R1b in ancient times
Strabo, Homer or any other Greek writer in ancient times did not use the word kush or kushite
you still have not shown the Ounanians carrying R1b
the only evidence of R1b in Africa are the Hausa and they claim descent from northern people
Ethiopian corresponded to Kush. Anyway, the Anatolians referred to themselves as Kushites.
The Hausa are not the only group to carry R1.
The phylogeography of R1 in Africa makes it clear that this y-chromosome is spread globally across Africa and includes the genetic structure of diverse African populations including Berber, Chadic, Cushitic, Khoisan,Pygmy, Niger-Congo, Nilo-Saharan and Semitic speaking African populations (Berniell-Lee et al, 2009; Cruciani et al, 2010; Wood et al, 2009). The fact that Dravidians carry the R haplogroup illustrate the recent introduction of R y-chromosome to Eurasia, because the Dravidians originally belonged to the C-Group of Nubia. Africans also carry haplogroup R1a. Research on y-haplogroups in Africa suggest that R1-M269 is also widespread in Africa.
Above is a figure from Gonzalez et al., of R1 in Guinea-Bissau. The Gonzalez et al article found that 10 out of 19 subjects in the study carried R1b1-P25 or M269. This is highly significant because it indicates that 53% of the R1 carriers in this study were M269, this finding is further proof of the widespread nature of this so-called Eurasian genes in Africa among populations that have not mated with Europeans . Moreover, Guinea-Bissau was a major area of origin of many slaves during the Atlantic Slave Trade, and, as a result the South American slaves probably already came to the New World carrying R-M269. The R1 haplogroup probably originated in Africa. The phylogeography of R1 in Africa makes it clear that this y-chromosome is spread globally across Africa and includes the genetic structure of diverse African populations including Berber, Chadic, Cushitic, Khoisan,Pygmy, Niger-Congo, Nilo-Saharan and Semitic speaking African populations (Berniell-Lee et al, 2009; Cruciani et al, 2010; Wood et al, 2009). The fact that Dravidians carry the R haplogroup illustrate the recent introduction of R y-chromosome to Eurasia.
Abu-Amero et al (20009) reveal the fact that Dravidians carry the R haplogroups illustrate the recent introduction of Ry-chromosomes to Eurasia. The frequency of haplotype M173 in Eurasia is as follows: Anatolia 0.19%, Iran 2.67%, Iraq 0.49% Oman 1.0%, Pakistan 0.57% and Oman 1.0% . This contrast sharply with the widespread distribution of R1 in Africa that ranges between 7- 95% in various parts of Africa, especially Cameroon (Coia et al, 2005). Coia et al (2005) has revealed that no maternal Eurasian lineages have been found among Sub-Saharan Africans with a R1- M173 profile. Haplogroup V88 has the greatest frequency in Africa. It is predominately carried by Chadic speakers, ranges between 2-60% among Central African Niger-Congo speakers (Cruciani et al, 2010). Researchers have found that the TMRCA of V88 was 9200-5600 kya (Cruciani et al, 2010).
The phylogenetically deep haplogroup R1b is mainly found in West Africa and the Sahel, where the frequency ranges between 85-100% among Niger Congo speakers (Cruciani et al, 2010). The paternal record of M173 on the African continent illustrates a greater distribution of this y-chromosome among varied African populations than, in Asia.
The greatest diversity of R1b in Africa is highly suggestive of an Africa origin for this male lineage. Archaeological (Lal, 1963), genetic (Winters, 2008;2010a), placenames (Balakrishnan, 2005) and linguistic data group (Aravanan,1979,1980; Upadhyaya, 1976,1979; Winters 1985a,1985b, 1989) linking Africans and Dravidian support the recent demic diffusion of SubSaharan Africans and gene flow from Africa to Eurasia. An early colonization of Eurasia 4kya by Sub-Saharan Africans and Dravidian carriers of R1-M173 is the best scenario to explain the high frequency and widespread geographical distribution of this y-chromosome on the African continent (Winters, 2010c). Given the greatest diversity of R1- M173, this is the most parsimonious model explaining the frequency of R-M173 in Africa. In conclusion, the R haplogroup probably originated in Africa. In my paper POSSIBLE AFRICAN ORIGIN OF Y-CHROMOSOME R1-M173 , I argue that the P clade originated in Africa because 1) the age of R-V88 and 2) the widespread nature of R1 in Africa. Researchers have found that the TMRCA of V88 was 9200-5600 kya (Cruciani et al, 2010). Eurasians carry the M269 (R1b1b2) mutation. The subclades of R1b1b2 include Rh1b1b2g (U106) (TMRCA 8.3kya) and R1b1b2h (U152) (TMRCA 7.4kya). The most recent common ancestor for R1b1b2 is probably 8kya (Balaresque et al, 2010).
In Africa we find R-M269 and V88. Clearly, R-V88 is older than R-M269 there is no evidence of archaeological evidence of a back migration or haplogroup R into Africa, but there is evidence of the migration of the Kushites and Proto-Sahara into Eurasia from Middle Africa. This supports the proposition the R haplogroups originated in Africa, not Eurasia. The fact remains that R-M269, is found among Sub-Saharan Africans from West, to East and Southern Africa. This supports my contention that this haplogroup is widespread in Africa.
.
In India the Dravidian people carry the R1a haplogroup The Dravidian people of India originally lived in Middle Africa and belonged to the Proto-Saharan Civilization. The Proto-Saharan civilization was situated in the Proto-Sahara, which includes Cameroon. . . In Cameroon we find carriers of R1a. In addition to carriers of R1a in Cameroon; the Dravidian languages are still spoken today in Cameroon see:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWyAYGlFZjkhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWyAYGlFZjk
In conclusion, the R macrohaplogroup probably originated in Africa. In my paper POSSIBLE AFRICAN ORIGIN OF Y-CHROMOSOME R1-M173 , I argue that the P clade originated in Africa because 1) the age of R-V88 and 2) the widespread nature of R1 in Africa.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Tutankhamen's body is too decayed to tell what haplogroup he comes from, the only R1b dna that they got from his mummy is from his white handlers
why are you saying R1b was gotten from Tutankhamen ?
Do you not understand what i typed?
king tut's handlers carry R1b not tut
it is near impossible to abstract Dna from a body that decayed thousands of years ago. king tuts body is surrounded by people of European descent thus causing a risk of contaminating the mummy with their Dna
I understand exactly what you said. You said " the only R1b dna that they got from his mummy is from his white handlers" because you say it is impossible for ancient DNA not to be contaminated by the people handling the specimen.
Let's say that's true.
So regardless of the source of the R1b, regardless of it being Tutankhamen's or that of the researchers why are you saying R1b was gotten?
Where is a credible source (keyword credible) that R1b was detected in the Tutankhamen mummy or from anybody involved in handling the mummy?
Have you done any basic research on this?
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the questioner: It is almost impossible to know if king tut carried R1b in ancient times
Strabo, Homer or any other Greek writer in ancient times did not use the word kush or kushite
you still have not shown the Ounanians carrying R1b
the only evidence of R1b in Africa are the Hausa and they claim descent from northern people
Ethiopian corresponded to Kush. Anyway, the Anatolians referred to themselves as Kushites.
The Hausa are not the only group to carry R1.
The phylogeography of R1 in Africa makes it clear that this y-chromosome is spread globally across Africa and includes the genetic structure of diverse African populations including Berber, Chadic, Cushitic, Khoisan,Pygmy, Niger-Congo, Nilo-Saharan and Semitic speaking African populations (Berniell-Lee et al, 2009; Cruciani et al, 2010; Wood et al, 2009). The fact that Dravidians carry the R haplogroup illustrate the recent introduction of R y-chromosome to Eurasia, because the Dravidians originally belonged to the C-Group of Nubia. Africans also carry haplogroup R1a. Research on y-haplogroups in Africa suggest that R1-M269 is also widespread in Africa.
Above is a figure from Gonzalez et al., of R1 in Guinea-Bissau. The Gonzalez et al article found that 10 out of 19 subjects in the study carried R1b1-P25 or M269. This is highly significant because it indicates that 53% of the R1 carriers in this study were M269, this finding is further proof of the widespread nature of this so-called Eurasian genes in Africa among populations that have not mated with Europeans . Moreover, Guinea-Bissau was a major area of origin of many slaves during the Atlantic Slave Trade, and, as a result the South American slaves probably already came to the New World carrying R-M269. The R1 haplogroup probably originated in Africa. The phylogeography of R1 in Africa makes it clear that this y-chromosome is spread globally across Africa and includes the genetic structure of diverse African populations including Berber, Chadic, Cushitic, Khoisan,Pygmy, Niger-Congo, Nilo-Saharan and Semitic speaking African populations (Berniell-Lee et al, 2009; Cruciani et al, 2010; Wood et al, 2009). The fact that Dravidians carry the R haplogroup illustrate the recent introduction of R y-chromosome to Eurasia.
Abu-Amero et al (20009) reveal the fact that Dravidians carry the R haplogroups illustrate the recent introduction of Ry-chromosomes to Eurasia. The frequency of haplotype M173 in Eurasia is as follows: Anatolia 0.19%, Iran 2.67%, Iraq 0.49% Oman 1.0%, Pakistan 0.57% and Oman 1.0% . This contrast sharply with the widespread distribution of R1 in Africa that ranges between 7- 95% in various parts of Africa, especially Cameroon (Coia et al, 2005). Coia et al (2005) has revealed that no maternal Eurasian lineages have been found among Sub-Saharan Africans with a R1- M173 profile. Haplogroup V88 has the greatest frequency in Africa. It is predominately carried by Chadic speakers, ranges between 2-60% among Central African Niger-Congo speakers (Cruciani et al, 2010). Researchers have found that the TMRCA of V88 was 9200-5600 kya (Cruciani et al, 2010).
The phylogenetically deep haplogroup R1b is mainly found in West Africa and the Sahel, where the frequency ranges between 85-100% among Niger Congo speakers (Cruciani et al, 2010). The paternal record of M173 on the African continent illustrates a greater distribution of this y-chromosome among varied African populations than, in Asia.
The greatest diversity of R1b in Africa is highly suggestive of an Africa origin for this male lineage. Archaeological (Lal, 1963), genetic (Winters, 2008;2010a), placenames (Balakrishnan, 2005) and linguistic data group (Aravanan,1979,1980; Upadhyaya, 1976,1979; Winters 1985a,1985b, 1989) linking Africans and Dravidian support the recent demic diffusion of SubSaharan Africans and gene flow from Africa to Eurasia. An early colonization of Eurasia 4kya by Sub-Saharan Africans and Dravidian carriers of R1-M173 is the best scenario to explain the high frequency and widespread geographical distribution of this y-chromosome on the African continent (Winters, 2010c). Given the greatest diversity of R1- M173, this is the most parsimonious model explaining the frequency of R-M173 in Africa. In conclusion, the R haplogroup probably originated in Africa. In my paper POSSIBLE AFRICAN ORIGIN OF Y-CHROMOSOME R1-M173 , I argue that the P clade originated in Africa because 1) the age of R-V88 and 2) the widespread nature of R1 in Africa. Researchers have found that the TMRCA of V88 was 9200-5600 kya (Cruciani et al, 2010). Eurasians carry the M269 (R1b1b2) mutation. The subclades of R1b1b2 include Rh1b1b2g (U106) (TMRCA 8.3kya) and R1b1b2h (U152) (TMRCA 7.4kya). The most recent common ancestor for R1b1b2 is probably 8kya (Balaresque et al, 2010).
In Africa we find R-M269 and V88. Clearly, R-V88 is older than R-M269 there is no evidence of archaeological evidence of a back migration or haplogroup R into Africa, but there is evidence of the migration of the Kushites and Proto-Sahara into Eurasia from Middle Africa. This supports the proposition the R haplogroups originated in Africa, not Eurasia. The fact remains that R-M269, is found among Sub-Saharan Africans from West, to East and Southern Africa. This supports my contention that this haplogroup is widespread in Africa.
.
In India the Dravidian people carry the R1a haplogroup The Dravidian people of India originally lived in Middle Africa and belonged to the Proto-Saharan Civilization. The Proto-Saharan civilization was situated in the Proto-Sahara, which includes Cameroon. . . In Cameroon we find carriers of R1a. In addition to carriers of R1a in Cameroon; the Dravidian languages are still spoken today in Cameroon see:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWyAYGlFZjkhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWyAYGlFZjk
In conclusion, the R macrohaplogroup probably originated in Africa. In my paper POSSIBLE AFRICAN ORIGIN OF Y-CHROMOSOME R1-M173 , I argue that the P clade originated in Africa because 1) the age of R-V88 and 2) the widespread nature of R1 in Africa.
where is the documentation of the Anatolians calling themselves Kushites
the Hausa mixed with other African tribes however they are the highest frequent carriers of R1b
where is the evidence of the Ounanians carrying R1b
Europe has the largest R1b Dna than any-other part of the world This concludes that R1b Dna originated in Europe and not Africa
Tutankhamen's body is too decayed to tell what haplogroup he comes from, the only R1b dna that they got from his mummy is from his white handlers
why are you saying R1b was gotten from Tutankhamen ?
Do you not understand what i typed?
king tut's handlers carry R1b not tut
it is near impossible to abstract Dna from a body that decayed thousands of years ago. king tuts body is surrounded by people of European descent thus causing a risk of contaminating the mummy with their Dna
I understand exactly what you said. You said " the only R1b dna that they got from his mummy is from his white handlers" because you say it is impossible for ancient DNA not to be contaminated by the people handling the specimen.
Let's say that's true.
So regardless of the source of the R1b, regardless of it being Tutankhamen's or that of the researchers why are you saying R1b was gotten?
Where is a credible source (keyword credible) that R1b was detected in the Tutankhamen mummy or from anybody involved in handling the mummy?
Have you done any basic research on this?
what eaxctly are you trying to ask?
the credible source is in these questions
who discovered Tutankhamen?
who were the handlers of Tutankhamen?
who conducted the genetic study on Tutankhamen?
i find it very convenient that Tutankhamen is related to the people who discovered him and handled him
quote:Originally posted by the questioner: where is the documentation of the Anatolians calling themselves Kushhites
the Hausa mixed with other African tribes however they are the highest frequent carriers of R1b
where is the evidence of the Ounanians carrying R1b
Europe has the largest R1b Dna than any-other part of the world This concludes that R1b Dna originated in Europe and not Africa
The frequency of R1 in Chad-Cameroon, and other parts of Africa is just as high as in Europe;the frequency of R1 in Africa ranges between 7- 95% in various parts of Africa, especially Cameroon .
.
Chad-Cameroon is not the only place R1 is found. Interestingly, Chad-Cameroon is larger than the area of Western Europe.
Moreover, the frequency of R1 in a particular region does not indicate place of origin.
The Egyptians made it clear that LOWER EGYPT was called : TAMEH , and UPPER EGYPT : TA SHEMA . [/b]
Because the ḫ3st (khas = Kushites), were living in Lower Egypt, when the Kings of Heqa ḫ3st took control of Egypt during the Hyksos period they were returning to the lands of their ancestors as Heqa ḫ3st (khas= Kushites) (Kings of the Kushites).
The khas [Kushites ] belonged to the C-Group people and lived in Upper and Lower Egypt between 3700-1300 BC and were called Tmhw (Temehus). The Temehus were organized into two groups: the Thnw (Tehenu) in the North and the Nhsj (Nehesy) in the South.
. .
Sahure referred to the Tehenu leader as “Hati Tehenu”. The name Hati corresponds to the name Hatti - a tribe in Anatolia. However, the Hatti people often referred to themselves as Kashkas. Kashkas corresponds to ḫ3st (Khas), and the Hyksos were identifying their ethnic origins when they called themselves ḫ3st
Hattians lived in Anatolia. They worshipped Kasku and Kusuh. They were especially prominent in the Pontic mountains. Their sister nation in the Halys Basin were the Kaska tribes. The Kaska and Hattians share the same names for gods, along with personal and place names (1). The Kaska had a strong empire which was never defeated by the Hittites.
The Hatti controlled the city state of Kussara. Kussara was situated in southern Anatolia.
The tribal names: Kings of Kish for the Sumerians, Kashka and Khas for the hyksos show that the Anatolians were Kushites.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
i find it very convenient that Tutankhamen is related to the people who discovered him and handled him
questions are not a credible source
A credible source is a peer reviewed journal article or book written by a professional scientist etc,
I am asking you why do you assume that R1b was documented by a credible source involving the mummy of Tutankhamen or of people involved in handling the mummy?
Where is the credible peer reviewed journal article or book claiming this ?
Clyde said this:
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: Tutankhamen carried R1b .
You assumed R1b to have been recorded (regardless of how it got there) just because Clyde said it. It is not wise to try to explain things based on premises that you have not checked.
If someone asks you why Robert De Niro's brother was in the mafia you are supposed to first find out if he had a brother before trying to deal with the question. - he didn't have one
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the questioner: where is the documentation of the Anatolians calling themselves Kushhites
the Hausa mixed with other African tribes however they are the highest frequent carriers of R1b
where is the evidence of the Ounanians carrying R1b
Europe has the largest R1b Dna than any-other part of the world This concludes that R1b Dna originated in Europe and not Africa
The frequency of R1 in Chad-Cameroon, and other parts of Africa is just as high as in Europe;the frequency of R1 in Africa ranges between 7- 95% in various parts of Africa, especially Cameroon .
.
Chad-Cameroon is not the only place R1 is found. Interestingly, Chad-Cameroon is larger than the area of Western Europe.
Moreover, the frequency of R1 in a particular region does not indicate place of origin.
The Egyptians made it clear that LOWER EGYPT was called : TAMEH , and UPPER EGYPT : TA SHEMA . [/b]
Because the ḫ3st (khas = Kushites), were living in Lower Egypt, when the Kings of Heqa ḫ3st took control of Egypt during the Hyksos period they were returning to the lands of their ancestors as Heqa ḫ3st (khas= Kushites) (Kings of the Kushites).
The khas [Kushites ] belonged to the C-Group people and lived in Upper and Lower Egypt between 3700-1300 BC and were called Tmhw (Temehus). The Temehus were organized into two groups: the Thnw (Tehenu) in the North and the Nhsj (Nehesy) in the South.
. .
Sahure referred to the Tehenu leader as “Hati Tehenu”. The name Hati corresponds to the name Hatti - a tribe in Anatolia. However, the Hatti people often referred to themselves as Kashkas. Kashkas corresponds to ḫ3st (Khas), and the Hyksos were identifying their ethnic origins when they called themselves ḫ3st
Hattians lived in Anatolia. They worshipped Kasku and Kusuh. They were especially prominent in the Pontic mountains. Their sister nation in the Halys Basin were the Kaska tribes. The Kaska and Hattians share the same names for gods, along with personal and place names (1). The Kaska had a strong empire which was never defeated by the Hittites.
The Hatti controlled the city state of Kussara. Kussara was situated in southern Anatolia.
The tribal names: Kings of Kish for the Sumerians, Kashka and Khas for the hyksos show that the Anatolian were Kushites.
^^^ im still not convinced because you have not provided the exact quote where the Anatolians called themselves Kushites
Europeans have the highest frequency of R1b than any other continent
the population of Europeans that carry R1b are higher than all the R1b African tribes combined
i find it very convenient that Tutankhamen is related to the people who discovered him and handled him
questions are not a credible source
A credible source is a peer reviewed journal article or book written by a professional scientist etc,
I am asking you why do you assume that R1b was documented by a credible source involving the mummy of Tutankhamen or of people involved in handling the mummy?
Where is the credible peer reviewed journal article or book claiming this ?
Clyde said this:
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: Tutankhamen carried R1b .
You assumed R1b to have been recorded (regardless of how it got there) just because Clyde said it. It is not wise to try to explain things based on premises that you have not checked.
If someone asks you why Robert De Niro's brother was in the mafia you are supposed to first find out if he had a brother before trying to deal with the question. - he didn't have one
LOL. You are such a liar. You posted the following yourself.
The haplogroup R-M269 arose about 9.500 years ago in the surrounding area of the Black Sea. The migration of this haplogroup into Europe started at the earliest with the spread of agriculture since 7.000 BC. It is ver probable that it is also connected to the Indoeuropeans who spread over Europe a little later in several waves of migrations.
In Egypt the contingent of this haplogroup is below 1% and partially caused by european immigration during the last 2.000 years.
Tutankhamun had been the last Pharao of the 18th dynasty and ruled from about 1.332 until 1.323 BC. His paternal lineage begins with Pharao Thutmose I. who ruled from about 1.504 until 1.492 BC. His paternal ancestry is unknown.
Therefore, it is still unclear how this line came from the region of origin to Egypt. The earliest evidence of agriculture dates back to 5000 BC. It is possible that Haplogroup R-M269 moved from the North to Egypt with the spread of agriculture from the region of the Fertile Crescent.
The fourth expansional wave of the probably indoeuropean Kurgan Culture between 2.500 and 2.200 BC is also a good candidate. This culture spread since 4.400 BC to Europe which explains the correlation with haplogroup R-M269. This haplogroup was also widespread in the indoeuropean Hittite empire in Anatolia. From the time of Akhenatens or Tuankhamuns reign a letter of an egyptian queen is known from the Hittite archives. In this letter she asks the Hittites King for one of his sons as a new Pharao because her husband died and she herself got no son.
The identity of the queen is unknown, perhaps the 18th dynasty was related to the Hittites, the origin of the R-M269-lineage could point to this.
The detailed context can only be clearified by further research. By the publication of the test result we want to contribute to the scientific discussion and bring it forward.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Some of those researchers you mentioned you purposely have distorted the numbers on. Myself and others have exposed this several times and there is no point in doing it over and over again.
People must check any Clyde Winters claim in referencing other researchers data properly
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
i find it very convenient that Tutankhamen is related to the people who discovered him and handled him
questions are not a credible source
A credible source is a peer reviewed journal article or book written by a professional scientist etc,
I am asking you why do you assume that R1b was documented by a credible source involving the mummy of Tutankhamen or of people involved in handling the mummy?
Where is the credible peer reviewed journal article or book claiming this ?
Clyde said this:
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: Tutankhamen carried R1b .
You assumed R1b to have been recorded (regardless of how it got there) just because Clyde said it. It is not wise to try to explain things based on premises that you have not checked.
If someone asks you why Robert De Niro's brother was in the mafia you are supposed to first find out if he had a brother before trying to deal with the question. - he didn't have one
peer reviewed does not make something credible
for something to truly be credible is that it must be presented to the public and tested by the public thus making it an irrefutable fact
for example if two professional travelers say the world is flat does it make it true? no because we can easily refute this by simply traveling the world ourselves
world traveling is open to the public thus making it an irrefutable fact that the world is round
unless dating and dna testing is open to the public then nothing is credible
quote:Originally posted by the questioner: where is the documentation of the Anatolians calling themselves Kushhites
the Hausa mixed with other African tribes however they are the highest frequent carriers of R1b
where is the evidence of the Ounanians carrying R1b
Europe has the largest R1b Dna than any-other part of the world This concludes that R1b Dna originated in Europe and not Africa
The frequency of R1 in Chad-Cameroon, and other parts of Africa is just as high as in Europe;the frequency of R1 in Africa ranges between 7- 95% in various parts of Africa, especially Cameroon .
.
Chad-Cameroon is not the only place R1 is found. Interestingly, Chad-Cameroon is larger than the area of Western Europe.
Moreover, the frequency of R1 in a particular region does not indicate place of origin.
The Egyptians made it clear that LOWER EGYPT was called : TAMEH , and UPPER EGYPT : TA SHEMA . [/b]
Because the ḫ3st (khas = Kushites), were living in Lower Egypt, when the Kings of Heqa ḫ3st took control of Egypt during the Hyksos period they were returning to the lands of their ancestors as Heqa ḫ3st (khas= Kushites) (Kings of the Kushites).
The khas [Kushites ] belonged to the C-Group people and lived in Upper and Lower Egypt between 3700-1300 BC and were called Tmhw (Temehus). The Temehus were organized into two groups: the Thnw (Tehenu) in the North and the Nhsj (Nehesy) in the South.
. .
Sahure referred to the Tehenu leader as “Hati Tehenu”. The name Hati corresponds to the name Hatti - a tribe in Anatolia. However, the Hatti people often referred to themselves as Kashkas. Kashkas corresponds to ḫ3st (Khas), and the Hyksos were identifying their ethnic origins when they called themselves ḫ3st
Hattians lived in Anatolia. They worshipped Kasku and Kusuh. They were especially prominent in the Pontic mountains. Their sister nation in the Halys Basin were the Kaska tribes. The Kaska and Hattians share the same names for gods, along with personal and place names (1). The Kaska had a strong empire which was never defeated by the Hittites.
The Hatti controlled the city state of Kussara. Kussara was situated in southern Anatolia.
The tribal names: Kings of Kish for the Sumerians, Kashka and Khas for the hyksos show that the Anatolian were Kushites.
^^^ im still not convinced because you have not provided the exact quote where the Anatolians called themselves Kushites
Europeans have the highest frequency of R1b than any other continent
the population of Europeans that carry R1b are higher than all the R1b African tribes combined
The names the Anatolians called themselves show their Kushite origin.
The hyksos called themselves Khas or kЗs
Hyksos left textual evidence of their use of the term xЗs Khas or kЗs, for Kush.
.
The Weni inscription makes it clear that the name Khas was made up (of three) N25 signs from Gardiner’s List of Egyptian Signs. The N25 sign also represents Kash = Kush. This means that N25 represented the name Kash and Khas for the ethononym Kushite.
.
.
The meaning of N25 as Kush and Kushite is obvious in the Hyksos scarabs where we see N25, as the people the Hyksos Kings ruled.
It is not my job to convince you I am just relaying the facts.
You have not provided any evidence disputing these facts so we can end the discussion.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
for something to truly be credible is that it must be presented to the public and tested by the public thus making it an irrefutable fact
So when Clyde said Tutankhamen carried R1b did you check to see if it was tested by the public?
No you assumed R1b was detected on Tutankhamen and proceeded to make up an explanation for it instead of seeing if there was a public tested source for it
quote:Originally posted by the questioner:
for something to truly be credible is that it must be presented to the public and tested by the public thus making it an irrefutable fact
However, "tested by the public" doesn't means anything. That is BS
Clyde fooled you into trying to answer a question and you tried to do it but didn't realize it was built on an unsubstantiated premise.
Then you made up more BS that all ancient DNA is contaminated and that it was impossible for Tut to have DNA and you also based that another false statement about the Hausa being the only R1b carriers in Africa.
One error after another. And did you check with the "public testing" ? Did you go to the public's data base of what they tested? No because that is nonsense
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the questioner: where is the documentation of the Anatolians calling themselves Kushhites
the Hausa mixed with other African tribes however they are the highest frequent carriers of R1b
where is the evidence of the Ounanians carrying R1b
Europe has the largest R1b Dna than any-other part of the world This concludes that R1b Dna originated in Europe and not Africa
The frequency of R1 in Chad-Cameroon, and other parts of Africa is just as high as in Europe;the frequency of R1 in Africa ranges between 7- 95% in various parts of Africa, especially Cameroon .
.
Chad-Cameroon is not the only place R1 is found. Interestingly, Chad-Cameroon is larger than the area of Western Europe.
Moreover, the frequency of R1 in a particular region does not indicate place of origin.
The Egyptians made it clear that LOWER EGYPT was called : TAMEH , and UPPER EGYPT : TA SHEMA . [/b]
Because the ḫ3st (khas = Kushites), were living in Lower Egypt, when the Kings of Heqa ḫ3st took control of Egypt during the Hyksos period they were returning to the lands of their ancestors as Heqa ḫ3st (khas= Kushites) (Kings of the Kushites).
The khas [Kushites ] belonged to the C-Group people and lived in Upper and Lower Egypt between 3700-1300 BC and were called Tmhw (Temehus). The Temehus were organized into two groups: the Thnw (Tehenu) in the North and the Nhsj (Nehesy) in the South.
. .
Sahure referred to the Tehenu leader as “Hati Tehenu”. The name Hati corresponds to the name Hatti - a tribe in Anatolia. However, the Hatti people often referred to themselves as Kashkas. Kashkas corresponds to ḫ3st (Khas), and the Hyksos were identifying their ethnic origins when they called themselves ḫ3st
Hattians lived in Anatolia. They worshipped Kasku and Kusuh. They were especially prominent in the Pontic mountains. Their sister nation in the Halys Basin were the Kaska tribes. The Kaska and Hattians share the same names for gods, along with personal and place names (1). The Kaska had a strong empire which was never defeated by the Hittites.
The Hatti controlled the city state of Kussara. Kussara was situated in southern Anatolia.
The tribal names: Kings of Kish for the Sumerians, Kashka and Khas for the hyksos show that the Anatolian were Kushites.
^^^ im still not convinced because you have not provided the exact quote where the Anatolians called themselves Kushites
Europeans have the highest frequency of R1b than any other continent
the population of Europeans that carry R1b are higher than all the R1b African tribes combined
The names the Anatolians called themselves show their Kushite origin.
The hyksos called themselves Khas or kЗs
Hyksos left textual evidence of their use of the term xЗs Khas or kЗs, for Kush.
.
The Weni inscription makes it clear that the name Khas was made up (of three) N25 signs from Gardiner’s List of Egyptian Signs. The N25 sign also represents Kash = Kush. This means that N25 represented the name Kash and Khas for the ethononym Kushite.
.
.
The meaning of N25 as Kush and Kushite is obvious in the Hyksos scarabs where we see N25, as the people the Hyksos Kings ruled.
It is not my job to convince you I am just relaying the facts.
You have not provided any evidence disputing these facts so we can end the discussion.
That is phony baloney linguistics of which you find similar sounding words in two different languages and then assume the languages are related and start making up stories about it instead of proper comparative methods to prove they really are genetically related
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the questioner: where is the documentation of the Anatolians calling themselves Kushhites
the Hausa mixed with other African tribes however they are the highest frequent carriers of R1b
where is the evidence of the Ounanians carrying R1b
Europe has the largest R1b Dna than any-other part of the world This concludes that R1b Dna originated in Europe and not Africa
The frequency of R1 in Chad-Cameroon, and other parts of Africa is just as high as in Europe;the frequency of R1 in Africa ranges between 7- 95% in various parts of Africa, especially Cameroon .
.
Chad-Cameroon is not the only place R1 is found. Interestingly, Chad-Cameroon is larger than the area of Western Europe.
Moreover, the frequency of R1 in a particular region does not indicate place of origin.
The Egyptians made it clear that LOWER EGYPT was called : TAMEH , and UPPER EGYPT : TA SHEMA . [/b]
Because the ḫ3st (khas = Kushites), were living in Lower Egypt, when the Kings of Heqa ḫ3st took control of Egypt during the Hyksos period they were returning to the lands of their ancestors as Heqa ḫ3st (khas= Kushites) (Kings of the Kushites).
The khas [Kushites ] belonged to the C-Group people and lived in Upper and Lower Egypt between 3700-1300 BC and were called Tmhw (Temehus). The Temehus were organized into two groups: the Thnw (Tehenu) in the North and the Nhsj (Nehesy) in the South.
. .
Sahure referred to the Tehenu leader as “Hati Tehenu”. The name Hati corresponds to the name Hatti - a tribe in Anatolia. However, the Hatti people often referred to themselves as Kashkas. Kashkas corresponds to ḫ3st (Khas), and the Hyksos were identifying their ethnic origins when they called themselves ḫ3st
Hattians lived in Anatolia. They worshipped Kasku and Kusuh. They were especially prominent in the Pontic mountains. Their sister nation in the Halys Basin were the Kaska tribes. The Kaska and Hattians share the same names for gods, along with personal and place names (1). The Kaska had a strong empire which was never defeated by the Hittites.
The Hatti controlled the city state of Kussara. Kussara was situated in southern Anatolia.
The tribal names: Kings of Kish for the Sumerians, Kashka and Khas for the hyksos show that the Anatolian were Kushites.
^^^ im still not convinced because you have not provided the exact quote where the Anatolians called themselves Kushites
Europeans have the highest frequency of R1b than any other continent
the population of Europeans that carry R1b are higher than all the R1b African tribes combined
The names the Anatolians called themselves show their Kushite origin.
The hyksos called themselves Khas or kЗs
Hyksos left textual evidence of their use of the term xЗs Khas or kЗs, for Kush.
.
The Weni inscription makes it clear that the name Khas was made up (of three) N25 signs from Gardiner’s List of Egyptian Signs. The N25 sign also represents Kash = Kush. This means that N25 represented the name Kash and Khas for the ethononym Kushite.
.
.
The meaning of N25 as Kush and Kushite is obvious in the Hyksos scarabs where we see N25, as the people the Hyksos Kings ruled.
It is not my job to convince you I am just relaying the facts.
You have not provided any evidence disputing these facts so we can end the discussion.
im not convinced that the hyksos were called Kushites. so far you haven't proved that
how would you know if the hyksos were Anatolians?
show me where the Anatolians themselves claimed they were kushites
for something to truly be credible is that it must be presented to the public and tested by the public thus making it an irrefutable fact
So when Clyde said Tutankhamen carried R1b did you check to see if it was tested by the public?
No you assumed R1b was detected on Tutankhamen and proceeded to make up an explanation for it instead of seeing if there was a public tested source for it
quote:Originally posted by the questioner:
for something to truly be credible is that it must be presented to the public and tested by the public thus making it an irrefutable fact
However, "tested by the public" doesn't means anything. That is BS
Clyde fooled you into trying to answer a question and you tried to do it but didn't realize it was built on an unsubstantiated premise.
Then you made up more BS that all ancient DNA is contaminated and that it was impossible for Tut to have DNA and you also based that another false statement about the Hausa being the only R1b carriers in Africa.
One error after another. And did you check with the "public testing" ? Did you go to the public's data base of what they tested? No because that is nonsense
Stop trying to make someone accept your views. People have to make up their own mind about a phenomena.
In relation to King Tut
quote:
Tutankhamun[edit]
An academic study which included DNA profiling of some of the related male mummies of the Eighteenth Dynasty of Egypt was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association in 2010.
Tutankhamun's Y-DNA haplogroup was not published in the academic paper,[29][30][31] however iGENEA, a Swiss personal genomics company, claimed to have reconstructed King Tut's Y-DNA profile based on screencaps from a Discovery Channel documentary about the study. iGENEA without producing any proof, proposed that King Tut belonged to Y-DNA haplogroup R1b1a2,[32][33]
Members of the research team that conducted the academic study published in 2010 stated they had not been consulted by iGENEA before they published the haplogroup information and described iGENEA's claims as "unscientific." [31] After pressure to publish Tutankhamun's full DNA report to confirm his Y-DNA results, the researchers refused to respond.
for something to truly be credible is that it must be presented to the public and tested by the public thus making it an irrefutable fact
So when Clyde said Tutankhamen carried R1b did you check to see if it was tested by the public?
No you assumed R1b was detected on Tutankhamen and proceeded to make up an explanation for it instead of seeing if there was a public tested source for it
quote:Originally posted by the questioner:
for something to truly be credible is that it must be presented to the public and tested by the public thus making it an irrefutable fact
However, "tested by the public" doesn't means anything. That is BS
Clyde fooled you into trying to answer a question and you tried to do it but didn't realize it was built on an unsubstantiated premise.
Then you made up more BS that all ancient DNA is contaminated and that it was impossible for Tut to have DNA and you also based that another false statement about the Hausa being the only R1b carriers in Africa.
One error after another. And did you check with the "public testing" ? Did you go to the public's data base of what they tested? No because that is nonsense
i never said king tut had R1b
i gave it the benefit of the doubt that maybe they did find R1b but it still doesnt mean it is from king tut
no scientific claim is credible unless proven by the public
the Hausa are the largest chadic group in Africa and have largest population of R1b carriers
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: ^^^ There's your answer questioner
"iGENEA without producing any proof"
and Clyde presents it as if it was proven
You have it backwards.The article makes it clear that the Egyptians never produced any "proof" disputing IGENEA.
If they did please cite the article/publication where the Egyptians disputed the IGENEA findings.
.
Your typical backward reasoning is that someone can make up a theory about anything and if someone can't disprove it it is therefore true.
Science doesn't work like that. You have to prove something to be true. You can't just make up a theory and then assume because somebody can't or doesn't want to disprove it the theory is true.
So somebody says blue elephants exists. Then somebody else says "no they don't" Then you say " have you checked the entire world to verify that? And they say no And then Clyde says that's proof blue elephants exists because somebody couldn't prove they don't. You do that constantly
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: ^^^ There's your answer questioner
"iGENEA without producing any proof"
and Clyde presents it as if it was proven
You have it backwards.The article makes it clear that the Egyptians never produced any "proof" disputing IGENEA.
If they did please cite the article/publication where the Egyptians disputed the IGENEA findings.
.
Your typical backward reasoning is that someone can make up a theory about anything and if someone can't disprove it it is therefore true.
Science doesn't work like that. You have to prove something to be true. You can't just make up a theory and then assume because somebody can't or doesn't want to disprove it the theory is true.
So somebody says blue elephants exists. Then somebody else says "no they don't" Then you say " have you checked the entire world to verify that? And they say no And then Clyde says that's proof blue elephants exists because somebody couldn't prove they don't. You do that constantly
This shows YOUR backward thinking. The Egyptians have the DNA.
The Egyptians could have easily provide the DNA proving that IGENEA was wrong. They have not provided any DNA to dispute the IGENEA's claim.
King Tut's DNA must be R1-M269. .
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic