quote:Originally posted by lovingspirit : you bet is not my friend we are not simple and we are ZI BEST
Egypt and Egyptians are dear to me, take some of the nonsense that some faces in Egypt today, off your mind, and look at the depth of the Egyptian individual and try to understand, yes they are lovely people.
I don't want to disapoint you. But I am not the typical Egyptian, I am 1/2 Sudanese, 1/2 Egyptian holding both citizenships.
Regards,
Amr
Posts: 1090 | From: Merowe-Nubia | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
i understand 3amr and if you dont te3asherhom you would never understand.... it is an emotional bond that only people who lived long enough there would understand and despite all problems... you still feel the deep link that attaches you to it... sudanese or egyptian its the same to me we were once one country :)i remember once a sudanese friend I had she always had that sweet smile in her face
-------------------- Always remembering that we are nothing without His Merciful hand over us. Posts: 284 | From: gods heaven | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lovingspirit : ignorance speak again... but i am tired of hearing... so ... bye birdy
LOL Ignorance does not speak historical and scientific facts like I do, but it sure does rebuke such facts without any valid justification why. Kiss your sanity good bye.
quote:Originally posted by AMR1: exactly what made the so called egyptian nation, past and present a race of their own, is the combination of many people, long before history was documented, only genetic and antropological studies can explain it to us.
LOL Sorry AMR, but all those groups of people I listed who emigrated into Egypt took place in historical times, most of which long after dynastic Egypt.
Can you show us which anthropological and genetic studies explain that Egyptians consisted of such people since prehistoric times?? And don't bring National Geographic, cuz we already covered that. National Geographic makes no mention of the peoples I listed anyway. Posts: 26444 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AMR1: Egypt and Egyptians are dear to me, take some of the nonsense that some faces in Egypt today, off your mind, and look at the depth of the Egyptian individual and try to understand, yes they are lovely people.
I don't want to disapoint you. But I am not the typical Egyptian, I am 1/2 Sudanese, 1/2 Egyptian holding both citizenships.
Regards,
Amr
Sure thing, and *BOTH* Egyptians and Sudanese of ancient times were indigenous Africans. Even today there are still peoples in both countries with no foreign ancestry. Those with foreign ancestry date to historical periods. Posts: 26444 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- Always remembering that we are nothing without His Merciful hand over us. Posts: 284 | From: gods heaven | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^LMAO at the previous poster who seems to be suffering from the same pysychological problem that previous Egyptian or self-proclaimed Egyptian posters like Abaza, Ayazid, and Salama suffered from.
The angry Afrangi suffers from a striking paradox that he or she is proud of their so-called ancient Egyptian heritage yet denies that heritage's very identity as African and therefore his/her African ancestry (if that person has any at all).
Posts: 26444 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
bye for now birdy catch ya tomorrow.... bye 3amr and PS to you birdie... am egyptian to the bone... for now i leave to think what you will answer me next... ciao for now
-------------------- Always remembering that we are nothing without His Merciful hand over us. Posts: 284 | From: gods heaven | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
do you know anybody who does not have an african ancestry, thousands of years back? because many will like to know.
I don't know what you mean by this question. All people ultimately have African ancestry but if you mean those with recent African ancestry, yes-- Eurasians.
Egyptians and Nubians were not Eurasians. Does that answer your question?
quote:Originally posted by Herukhuti: lovingspirit is a really funny guy he has his whole thing set out from his chosen name, picture and his manner of drivel (te3asherhom ).
...smoke it
Yes, trolls come in all kinds of guises even passive "light-hearted" ones.
Trolls are like pyschological disorders like that, some sociopathic others manic depressive. LOLPosts: 26444 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
how can a nubian mummy have soft black hair and it died 3000 years ago. indigneous Africans can not have such a hair.
how can some egyptian phoroahs long before the hyksos have brown hair , why many pictures show many egyptians with features that is not of an african.
Posts: 1090 | From: Merowe-Nubia | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Loving spirit,I am as proud of Egypt as you but no way can I say modern day Egyptians are %100 pure free of foreign ethnic influences. Infact, where I live in America is a large population of Egyptian immigrants[including myself] both Muslim and Christian[Coptic] that have mixture from Greeks,Armenians,Turks and etc.
Not even some Sai'idi or Nubian groups are %100 pure,for I know of many Nubians,for example, that have mixed with Turkish soliders and even Mamelukes. Around Middle Egypt[ almost Sa3ed many nomadic Berber and bedouin groups have settled villages or assimilated in with fellahin. The same is true of many fellahin villages in northern Egypt. Still,in my opinion, Sa3eedi and Nubians are more represenative of the ancient Egyptians than Cairene or Bahary Egyptians. For non-Egyptians the term Bahary means northern Egypt.
Djehuti, I hate to say it but in Egypt[both Northern and Southern areas] have deep prejustices against Africans from the deep interior and cases of melanophobia. Honestly, I never seen a Sa3eedi as bad as Amr but it definately exists.
ya Amr you remind me of Osman ‘Abd al-Basit. You probably know who that is and a joke I hear all the time Aw il Sudany ili kan nifso yitala3 ibno mohandes 3ashan yibneelo 3imara 3ashan yishtaghal feeha bawab Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
do you know anybody who does not have an african ancestry, thousands of years back? because many will like to know.
This is a totally irrelevant and gratuitous remark since AMR1 understands that the people who founded Kemet,as well as the pre-dynastic, and the pre-historic cultures that were its precursors, were indigenous to the Nile Valley, sharing the PN2 clade with other Africans; nor were they ever a part of the OOA movement from roughly 60KYA.
AMR1 continues to rant about people of Kemet not being a "pure race" while failing to specify what that means.
Meanwhile the people of the Levant who speak an African language and carry African genes are pure or are held to a different standard of purity?
Reminds one of the new testament saying about observing the speck in someone else's eye while ignoring the beam in your own eye.
Bottom line: people like AMR1 still believe that black Africans are too stupid to found a civilization on their own. They must have had outside help.
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
how can a nubian mummy have soft black hair and it died 3000 years ago. indigneous Africans can not have such a hair
Amr,the hair texture on mummies most likely has been straightened by either burial conditions or embalming materials. Only way to determine natural hair texture is through electron micrscope. BTW, the Bahima people of Uganda and southern Sudanese often have wavy course hair texture. Both of these groups have had little interaction with Western Asians.
The whole hair texture thing reminds me of a story I read about a northern Sudanese man that tugged at his hair saying to the Syrian cab driver look I am neither black nor African. Hahahahahahaha All you can do is laugh at the stupid bawabeean.
quote:how can some egyptian phoroahs long before the hyksos have brown hair , why many pictures show many egyptians with features that is not of an african.
What features do you mean? Define ''African'' features for me please? Plus show me a pharoah with natural brown hair?
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Omar Abd al Basit[Amr] will no doubt write something about Somalis being mixed up and try to attribute indigenous features to some mythical Western Asian nomads.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AMR1: Egypt and Egyptians are dear to me, take some of the nonsense that some faces in Egypt today, off your mind, and look at the depth of the Egyptian individual and try to understand, yes they are lovely people.
I don't want to disapoint you. But I am not the typical Egyptian, I am 1/2 Sudanese, 1/2 Egyptian holding both citizenships.
Regards,
Amr
Sure thing, and *BOTH* Egyptians and Sudanese of ancient times were indigenous Africans. Even today there are still peoples in both countries with no foreign ancestry. Those with foreign ancestry date to historical periods.
How would we count or estimate those with foreign ancestry and those with not? Is it through genetics or through skin colour and features, or through domestic geography such as rural and urban egyptians? According to the quote below atleast 80% of the people of Egypt and rest of north African population don't have foreign genes? Considering the following quotation below
quote:"They [Asiatics] left only a small impact in North Africa," Wells says. "No more than 20 percent of the men we sampled had Y chromosomes that originated in the Middle East. Most carried the aboriginal North African M96 [Haplogroup E] pattern."
I dont think females have ever conquered and spread their genes more than males, so it wouldn't seem logical to count mtdna as explanation for current features. So how are we gonna have it? I'm sorry but theirs to much contradiction in different topics relating to Ancient Egyptian makeup. Either modern Egyptians male lineage are 80% aboriginal or they were not, period. As it seems through the above quote, foreign displacement of the natives don't hold much water. Considering only 20% of the male lineage are identified not to be aboriginal North African.
Posts: 1420 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Ausar:BTW, the Bahima people of Uganda and southern Sudanese often have wavy course hair texture
The Bahima are related to Tutsis, and are actuallyy their ancestors and are more numerous than the Tutsi. You can find them in Tanzania, Burundi, Uganda and RDC, however they are very few in Rwanda. Where did you hear about Bahima in Southern Sudan? It's true some people in Southern Sudan and Central Africa have curly hair but it's not necesseraly the Bahima only ...But where did you hear that they have often curly hair?
posted
Actually,Yonis, lots of Circassian concubines came into Cairo during the Medieval era of Egypt. You also had Moroccans;Armenians;Syrians;Arabs and you name it thatcame through Cairo and the Delta. During the Umayyad period a caliph even settled bedouin Arabs in the eastern Delta. Bedouins were settled in parts of Middle and Upper Egypt but most refused to take up agritculture and went into the deserts but harassed the fellahin.
Most of the geneticists don't know much of this because most don't study this era in Egypt's history.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I read about the Bahima in old anthropological journals. I never said Bahima were in southern Sudan but that some Southern Sudanese have a wavy course type hair.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Omar Abd al Basit[Amr] will no doubt write something about Somalis being mixed up and try to attribute indigenous features to some mythical Western Asian nomads.
It's actually important for all Africanists to understand 'why' this is incorrect, and how those who insist upon this fallacy end up contradicting themselves.
Immediately after it was accepted in the anthropological community that east africa was the origin of humanity, some eurocentric scholars scrambled to invent a new guise under which claims for european priority and supremacy might be maintained.
Observing that paleolithic human remains in Africa were diverse and did not match any 'true negro' stereotype, some claimed that 'k-zoids' [undefined then as now] were the original population of east africa.
This was based upon features such as relatively long heads narrow noses and limited prognathous.
This are the same features found quite typically in Nile Valley Km.t and Kush, and....also in modern East Africa.
However, in order to posit a non African Nile Valley civilisation, some Eurocentrists implied such features attributable to admixture of 'n-groid and k-zoid' racial archtypes.
On the one hand the features are said to characterise the original African population, somehow differentiating them from modern Africans......on the other they are attributed to recent admixture, which would imply that they are not indigenous to Africa to begin with.
Which is it?
What is avoided, is the logical conclusion that such features represent a physical continuity in Africa.
A likelihood finally acknowledged in the recent Brace Study:
Note the continuity between ancient and modern northeast africa - especially when compared with europe, which shows a profound change in the neolithic and then - *discontinuityA* between neolithic and modern times.
No European and certainly no Arab can claim any concept of *ethnic purity* relative to East Africans, or most anyone else for that matter.
Once this is understood the Eurocentric ruse of the 'mulatoo' Egypt is easily dismissed.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:I read about the Bahima in old anthropological journals.
Well they are wrong, some have curly hair as others among Great Lakes Africans and Southern Sudanese but it's a tough sell to generalize, it's the case in the Horn of Africa and Northern Sudan: many cushitic and semitic speakers especially the Oromos and Amhara don't have curly hair, however it is true that Somali have a tendancy to have more curly hair even if some of them are darker that the average horner. And I have the impression that most of the people who write on this forum never met many Somali, a Tutsi, or a Hima. Indeed they tend to have extreme features as other Africans like the Khoisan speaker of Southern Africa or the Batwa: whereas Eurasians don't have those extreme features: Elongated Africas tend to have extremely thin nose and long faces among women and men... to the point that many men have the tendacy to look like women if you use a European standard...no wonder: those extreme features impress a lot Europeans and North Americans...that's why they are in high demand in the fashion industry:Somalis, Ethiopians, Southern Sudanese... Khoisans on their part tend to have systematically slanted eyes and thick eyefold compared to Eastern Asian who appear to be more mixed...
quote:How would we count or estimate those with foreign ancestry and those with not?
You can't do this in any thurough, simplistic and accurate way with anyone, anywhere. If that's what you're asking.
quote:Is it through genetics or through skin colour and features
Genetics is geneology, is bloodline, is ancestry. To be related to another person is to be related by *genes*. They are causal and determinative.
Skin color and 'features' - are not and accurate measure of blood relatedness. Similarities and differences in feature can be both 'analogous' [coincidental] and 'homologous' [genetic].
quote: or through domestic geography such as rural and urban egyptians?
I don't understand this part. Obviously you know geography is not ancestry?
quote:According to the quote below atleast 80% of the people of Egypt and rest of north African population don't have foreign genes?
That's and over simplification.
A study of Y chromosome along contiguous areas of the Egyptian Nile Valley reveal, southern Egyptians are overwhelmingly of East African origin [E3b]. Northern Egyptians are more of a combination of East African E3b and SouthWest Asian J. According to SOY Keita, some of the J lineages are likely of Neolithic provenince, but much of it is also likely late kingdom [Hyksos?] to Islamic Arab, in origin.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
As an African-American it simply boggles the mind to see someone like Amr obsess over the Ancient Egyptians having substantial enough admixture to be considered "mixed" because he feels that if they were "pure" Africans he'd have less connection with them.
I doubt that a single Ancient Egyptian would be of my "pedigree" (Being part Native American) so if I am by Amr's definition a "mixed" person of partial African descent vs. pure I believe the Ancient Egyptians to be something I'm not, a predominately indegenious African people with few foreign influences during Pharonic times.
I don't even to my knowledge have ancestry from the Ancient Egyptians (very few African-Americans of Middle passage descent would and few to none would be predominately descended from them) and none of this obscures my view of the facts.
Amr would do well to stop obsessing over an Ancient people to the point where his personal indentity would be confused beyond reason if he were proven to be wrong.
Posts: 1203 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Question to Mansa and Rasol: Why do you bother? This guy is from Sudan...He's no different from Meskel...let him deal with his identity problem...Why do you react to his posts?
posted
^ I'm uninterested in Amr1, who is a basketcase.
I'm more interested in everyone else.....
quote: As an African-American it simply boggles the mind to see someone like Amr obsess over the Ancient Egyptians having substantial enough admixture to be considered "mixed" because he feels that if they were "pure" Africans he'd have less connection with them.
To get Amr1 you have to understand the psychology of Arabisation, in which everything African or Black is vile.
To be mulatoo is to not be Black, to not be African and to not have to hate oneself.
Even some southern Sudanese call themselves green in order to *not* be Black.
He's really a complete brainwash victim, and I don't hold out much hope for him.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Agreed...the result of Arabization, it's worse than European colonization...as an example South Africans lived side by side with Europeans for hundred years but never abandoned their original African culture except for few...but look in Sudan...or some other part of Africa, especially in North Africa...It's a catastrophe... It's a shame It's a little bit similar to the French colonization, they take your soul...they make you think that "we are all the same"...as a result African nations who were colonized by English are more independent...this is due to the English experience: they know that Irish, Scottish, Welsh, Cornish are all different...but French, Dutch, Portuguese, Spanish, Italians are more homogenous and don't really care about local subtleties....same like the Arabs: "you're like us or against us". The Southern Sudanese: the Dinkas and others were smart enough unlike others to figure this out...and they won the war against the Arab world.
Arabism, is a culture, you adopt the culture, u become an Arab, it has nothing to do with race.
Why would any African want to become an Arab, if you have your own authentic identity, which goes back since when there was no such thing as "Arab"? This can almost be likened to a father/Uncle adopting the son's/nephew's name, rather than the other way around.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Africa: The Southern Sudanese: the Dinkas and others were smart enough unlike others to figure this out...and they won the war against the Arab world
LOL, which war against the Arab world? Posts: 1420 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I find Amr to be less ignorant than African Americans, other Africans and the Phillipino dude debating about the race of Amr's (like it or not) ancesters. Amr no matter how silly he sounds to some in here...he is actually more satisfied and confident about who he is than the people calling him names...
Posts: 554 | From: Somaliland | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
In fact the Dinkas did not win against the North, they lost 2.5 million. The North lost 20000.
They got their right for deciding to secede after the Americans pressured the Khartoum government to give them that right, Secession for many Southern politicians means a deadly solution, because it will give them a land locked country with no access to the rich Arabian gulf business opportunities. Southerners by the way hate Arab northerners but have very close relations with other Arab countries.
posted
I won't even address the hair issue, because I have explained to amnesiac AMR about native African hair texture for like hundreds of times now. So I'm not going to do it.
quote:Originally posted by ausar: The whole hair texture thing reminds me of a story I read about a northern Sudanese man that tugged at his hair saying to the Syrian cab driver look I am neither black nor African. Hahahahahahaha All you can do is laugh at the stupid bawabeean.
LMAOPosts: 26444 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ausar you said the attached quote, that is sad.
quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally posted by ausar:
The whole hair texture thing reminds me of a story I read about a northern Sudanese man that tugged at his hair saying to the Syrian cab driver look I am neither black nor African. Hahahahahahaha All you can do is laugh at the stupid bawabeean.
quote:Originally posted by Yonis: How would we count or estimate those with foreign ancestry and those with not? Is it through genetics or through skin colour and features, or through domestic geography such as rural and urban egyptians? According to the quote below atleast 80% of the people of Egypt and rest of north African population don't have foreign genes? Considering the following quotation below
"They [Asiatics] left only a small impact in North Africa," Wells says. "No more than 20 percent of the men we sampled had Y chromosomes that originated in the Middle East. Most carried the aboriginal North African M96 [Haplogroup E] pattern."
Well there is no certain way yet of measuring the exact amount of 'admixture' among people. The closest thing we have to doing such is genetics. Definitely not by physical appearance as a persons phenotype says absolutely nothing about genetic relation or even lineage.
In genetics so far, all that has been established is identifying lineages either paternal lineage of the Y-chromosome, maternal lineage by mitochondrial chromosomes, or autosomal chromosomes-- everything else. These merely identify genetic markers that are associated with certain populations and origins.
quote:I dont think females have ever conquered and spread their genes more than males, so it wouldn't seem logical to count mtdna as explanation for current features. So how are we gonna have it? I'm sorry but theirs to much contradiction in different topics relating to Ancient Egyptian makeup. Either modern Egyptians male lineage are 80% aboriginal or they were not, period.
It is very true that practically all actual invasions, especially military ones and the first waves of colonisation by scouts and explorers are usually male. Females usually enter the scene as part of general immigration of whole families and communities including children, or as slaves etc.
We know that during Medieval times, Circassian and Slavic women were transported to Egypt as slaves and concubines for the Muslim elite. Before that, there were Italian women who were part of the Roman colonists, and before them there were Greek women etc. All throughout the historic periods beginning with the Hyksos were women who migrated with their communities into Egypt.
quote:As it seems through the above quote, foreign displacement of the natives don't hold much water. Considering only 20% of the male lineage are identified not to be aboriginal North African.
Indeed, the Arab-Islamic invasion of North Africa was not like that of the European invasion of North America. There was no large scale genocide on the natives but rather a process of the minority invaders (usually males) intermarrying with native women and vice versa.
If indigenous male lineages are that significant, just imagine how significant indigenous female lineages are!
Posts: 26444 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The two detractors in this thread (AMR and Lovingspirit) do nothing but make unsupported statements. Regarding AE, if you can't back up claims with scientific literature, then refrain from making claims. It's tiring for me to read so I can imagine how it must be for the actual people posting in the thread.
posted
I am saying that Ancient Egyptians could not have been pure and i proved with articles from the american genetic gjournal which shows european genes that came in pre historic times all the way in cameron.
i also gave the site of the national geographic showing migration back into africa from europe and asia, for thousands of years.
quote:Originally posted by AMR1: I am saying that Ancient Egyptians could not have been pure and i proved with articles from the american genetic gjournal which shows european genes that came in pre historic times all the way in cameron.
Not sure when you'll stop this nonsense about "purity", but how about the source of "pre-historic" European lineages in "Cameroon"?
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
You're wasting your time, he's been around for more than a year, just take him back to Sudan issues...that's where he's more useful...he's the proof of an African looser...they lost...physically against real Africans (southerners) and spiritually: the Arabs took their soul...I mean he even acknowledges that they were culturally Nubian in the past. Take him back to Sudan. He's just a loser. Please note that I don't reply to his posts unless it's a Sudanese issue...Let's get the beef...
quote:Originally posted by AMR1: One isolated clade (or clades) of Y-chromosomes that appear to belong to Haplogroup R* is found at high frequency among the native populations of northern Cameroon in west-central Africa, which is believed to reflect a prehistoric back-migration of an ancient proto-Eurasian population into Africa; some researchers have reported having also detected Haplogroup K* Y-chromosomes at a very low frequency among these same Cameroonian populations, which also suggests a Eurasian affinity. Some instances of Haplogroup R* have also been reported from samples of Australian aboriginal populations.
One isolated clade (or clades) of Y-chromosomes that appear to belong to Haplogroup R* is found at high frequency among the native populations of northern Cameroon in west-central Africa, which is believed to reflect a prehistoric back-migration of an ancient proto-Eurasian population into Africa; some researchers have reported having also detected Haplogroup K* Y-chromosomes at a very low frequency among these same Cameroonian populations, which also suggests a Eurasian affinity. Some instances of Haplogroup R* have also been reported from samples of Australian aboriginal populations.
R*-M173 lineages haven't been found in Europeans, how then can you postulate it to be indication of "pre-historic" European migrations into Africa, much less in northern Cameroon? R*-M173 have been found in highest frequencies in Northern Cameroonians.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AMR1: Your continued donations keep Wikipedia running! Haplogroup R (Y-DNA) From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search In human genetics, Haplogroup R is a Y-chromosome DNA haplogroup, a subgroup of haplogroup P, associated with the M207 mutation. It is believed to have occurred somewhere in North West Asia between 30,000 and 35,000 years ago. However, most of the rare forms of Haplogroup R chromosomes, as well as most cases of the closely related Haplogroup Q, are found among populations of Central Asia, South Asia, Siberia, or Native Americans.
The majority of members of haplogroup R belong to the sub-haplogroup R1, defined by marker M173. R1 is very common throughout Europe and western Eurasia. Its distribution is believed to be associated with the re-settlement of Eurasia following the last glacial maximum. Its main subgroups are R1a (M17) and R1b (M343).
Haplogroup R1a Haplogroup R1a1
Haplogroup R1
Haplogroup R Haplogroup R1b Haplogroup R1b1
Haplogroup R2
R1a likely originated in the Eurasian Steppes, and is associated with the Kurgan culture and Proto-Indo-European expansion. It is primarily found in Central and Western Asia, India, and the Slavic peoples of Eastern Europe. R1b originated prior to or during the last glaciation, when it was concentrated in refugia in southern Europe and the Aegean. It is the most common haplogroup in Western Europe, but has been found at low frequency as far away as Iran. In Southern England the frequency of R1b is about 70%; in parts of Spain, Portugal and Ireland, it is as high as 90%; and in parts of north-western Ireland it reaches 98%. Less common is the alternate subgroup R2 (M124), found only in populations of India, Iran, Central Asia, and the Caucasus.
Individuals whose Y-chromosomes possess all the mutations on internal nodes of the Y-DNA tree down to and including M207 (which defines Haplogroup R) but which display neither the M173 mutation that defines Haplogroup R1 nor the M124 mutation that defines Haplogroup R2 are categorised as belonging to group R*. One isolated clade (or clades) of Y-chromosomes that appear to belong to Haplogroup R* is found at high frequency among the native populations of northern Cameroon in west-central Africa, which is believed to reflect a prehistoric back-migration of an ancient proto-Eurasian population into Africa; some researchers have reported having also detected Haplogroup K* Y-chromosomes at a very low frequency among these same Cameroonian populations, which also suggests a Eurasian affinity. Some instances of Haplogroup R* have also been reported from samples of Australian aboriginal populations.
posted
You must have missed the subtle but significant points of my earlier post. Which Europeans have R*-M173 **undifferentiated** lineages, that are found in the highest frequencies in Northern Cameroon?
M173 chromosomes (group R) are observed in the Bantu of southern Cameroon (14.3%), Oman (10.7%), Egypt (6.8%), and the Hutu (1.4%). Whereas the R1*-M173 undifferentiated lineage is present in all four populations, the two downstream mutations, M17 and M269, are confined to Egypt and Oman. - Luis et al.
... The Oman collection in the present study is the only population outside of Africa in which R1*-M173 has been found. - Luis et al.
^^Speaks of the relative rarity with which undifferentiated M173 lineages are found, outside of Africa.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Supercar, You are waisting your time, he's a loser...they took their souls...what's the difference between Meskel and Amr1? If you can't figure this out after more than a year dealing with him...you must have the Amr1 syndrome yourself...he's nobody culturally....ignore him.
quote:Originally posted by Africa: Supercar, You are waisting your time, he's a loser...they took their souls...what's the difference between Meskel and Amr1? If you can't figure this out after more than a year dealing with him...you must have the Amr1 syndrome yourself...he's nobody culturally....ignore him.
In case you haven't noticed, via your own ignorance, I don't post simply for the person I'm responding to. I present objective material, that is open to challenging by any observer. Trust me, I'm very much conscious of what I'm doing, more than any newbie can possibly realize; I've been posting here for quite a while now. Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AMR1: I am saying that Ancient Egyptians could not have been pure and i proved with articles from the american genetic gjournal which shows european genes that came in pre historic times all the way in cameron.
LOL
First of all, haplogroup R is occurs in very low frequency in Egypt anway.
Second, the type of R that is found among West Africans like the Cameroonians is original underived *R1 (-M173). The forms of R found in most Eurasians, especially Europeans is descended derived types of R.
As Supercar cites:
M173 chromosomes (group R) are observed in the Bantu of southern Cameroon (14.3%), Oman (10.7%), Egypt (6.8%), and the Hutu (1.4%). Whereas the R1*-M173 undifferentiated lineage is present in all four populations, the two downstream mutations, M17 and M269, are confined to Egypt and Oman. - Luis et al.
^^LOL As the citation says, R lineages in Egypt are minimal and even then, many of them are downstream or derived/descended forms of R and not the underived original form found in Cameroon. Meaning that many of these R types found in Egypt come from recent groups from historical periods who are more than likely Europeans!
quote:i also gave the site of the national geographic showing migration back into africa from europe and asia, for thousands of years.
Yes and we refuted those claims for the same reason as your above claims with haplogroup R:
It can be argued that it is not likely that the "northern" genetic profile is simply due to "Eursasians" having colonized supra-Saharan regions from external African sources. It might be likely that the greater percentage of haplotypes called "Eurasian" are predominantly, although not solely, of indigenous African origin. As a term "Eurasian" is likely misleading, since it suggests a single locale of geographical origins. This is because it can be postulated that differentiation of the L3* haplogroup began before the emigration out of Africa, and that there would be indigenous supra/Saharan or Horn-supra-Saharan haplotypes. More work and careful analysis of mtDNA and the archaeological data and likely probabilities are needed. Early hunting and gathering Paleolithic populations can be modeled as having roamed between northern Africa and Eurasia, leaving asymmetrical distribution of various derivative variants over a wide region, giving the appearance of Eurasian incursion." - Keita et al.
While Keita addresses mtDNA maternal lineages, the exact same can be said about paternal lineages as well.
Because Africa holds the greatest genetic diversity and is ultimately the source of all Eurasian genetic diversity, it would be foolhardy to assume that just because there are African populations who share similar haplogroups with Eurasians it must mean they recieved they have Eurasian ancestry!
As Keita says, it is more likely that it is the opposite-- that Eurasians inherited these lineages from Africans.
Which is why National Geographic is wrong to say that U6, M1, N1, and at one time even E3 were 'Eurasian'.
Therefore, your argument of prehistoric Eurasian migrations into Africa is null; as is your arguments on 'mixture' or 'purity'.
Posts: 26444 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Africa: I call it the Rasol's excuse...we use him to teach others...It's just doesn't work with him.
But it works with you, which is the point. But that's ok, you don't need to understand the method as long as you get the message.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
Topic Closed
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
:
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Aw il Sudany ili kan nifso yitala3 ibno mohandes 3ashan yibneelo 3imara
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
LMAO 
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
Therefore, your argument of prehistoric Eurasian migrations into Africa is null; as is your arguments on 'mixture' or 'purity'.
Printer-friendly view of this topic