posted
It never fails; introduce a new and important scientific discipline and it doesn't take long before someone takes and uses it to separate people from their money! This latest ruse is aimed almost primarily at African-Americans who wish to trace their roots, as if being pan-African is not enough. There are and have been posters here on this forum who have fallen for this scam.
Let's do the math to show how fraudulent this DNA-Roots thing is:
A) People assume, I suppose that they have a single "Adam and Eve" tribe somewhere in Africa during the 1700s (good time period for comparison for something which took place between c1440 and c1900). "It's not logical, Captain"
Lets trace EVERYONE's lineage back 300 years (10 generations); that'll be around 1707: 0 - You 1 - 2 parents 2 - 4 grand parents 3 - 8 great grand parents 4 - 16 .gp 5 - 32 .gp 6 - 64 .gp 7 - 128 .gp 8 - 256 .gp 9 - 512 .gp 10 - 1,024 .grand parents; your direct lineage back in 1707
So, for you to say that you are descended from the "Igbu", for example, then the majority of those 1,024 folks would have to be from "Igbuland!"
Most African-Americans are at least 10 generation Americans, and are the culmination of all African peoples, the same being White (European) Americans who are the culmination of all European peoples; both groups having Native American, and other ancestries. Ask any White American what their (immediate) roots are and they'll respond something like "Scottish on my father's side and German on my mother's", their background being more diverse than that if examined...
B) Barack Obama example; a "New" African American: Senator Obama's heritage, at least on his father's side is probably easier to trace;
1) each of his father's parents belong to the Luo ethnic group, which means that in all likely hood, considering Africans propensity to marry mostly within their own ethnic community, most of these grandparents dating back to the 1700s were probably all Luo; with an occasional Turkana, Gikuyu, Masai, Somali, Britisher in the mix. 2) on his mother's side, it's a little more complicated, she being a White American but 3) White folks have written records of their ancestry which can go all the way back to the 1700s at least, and it's why they rely less on "DNA roots science"
C) Most of this business is pushed by getting celebrities to "use DNA to trace your roots." DNA is a great scientific tool, but I doubt that it can trace all of the lineages of the 1,024 people who came together, coupled that led to the final celebrity of today...
1 ) There's some discussion here on this forum of whether or not Oprah Winfrey is a Zulu or a Kpelle(?); as though "Adam and Eve" could only be from one ethnic group in Africa - the likely hood is that she has both Zulu and Kpelle(?) ancestors, as well as Akan, Igbo, Yoruba, Songhai, etc., etc., from amongst the 1,024 direct ancestors she had back in the 1700s that culminated with her birth...
D) It's AMAZING that one of the few benefits of chattel slavery was the formation of the African-American ethnic group from the myriad peoples brought over, only to have this undermined by African-Americans who are looking for a single ethnic group to identify with; "re-tribalization" it's called. This is disgraceful at best!
Again, because White folks have documentary records of their ancestry, they seem impervious to this type of silliness...
Posts: 3344 | From: Berkeley | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, but genes do get bred out with time. Many people may have ancestry in their lineage that is no longer reflected in their genes. So technically that person is no longer a part of them biologically.
Posts: 354 | From: Atlanta, GA | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
NRY and mtDNA markers can approximate to the regions by way of populations therein of course, where a designated marker is prevalent, and hence, making it possible to link one's ancestry to populations from which he/she likely ultimately stems from. Of course, other ancestry not represented by these markers in an individual are often not discernable, and goes back to what I said earlier elsewhere...
Simply put:
A male person will receive his father's line of ancestry almost intact, unless until of course, a UEP occurred somewhere down the road. Even then, the father's ancestral line genetic data isn't lost. What would not be revealed about any other Y lineage, is that from the mother's side. This is where the mother's mitochondrial lineage reigns in. The mitochondrial lineage is generally received only from the mother. Here too, one can trace the person's maternal line almost intact.
Any potential additional info about the said male's recent ancestry composition, like that of the person's grandfather from the mother's side and the person's grandmother from the father's side [whose Y chromosome marker and mtDNA marker are lost respectively] via immediate paternal and maternal ancestry, might be acheived via autosomal analysis.
Both a male and female receive mtDNA only from the maternal parent. And since, females don't normally carry Y chromosomes, they don’t receive it from their father. So the father’s line of ancestry via Y chromsome is lost in a female offspring, but autosomal analysis will quite likely make up for that loss in another way. Autosomal test can only take one as far as the much more recent lines of ancestry, and thereafter, generally looses its usefulness as 'biohistoric' marker; this vacuum is filled in by the Y chromosome and mtDNA markers
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well intended post by Wally, and the underlying spirit of caution is correct, but the mathamatics are wrong.
A person does not have 2 to the X generation ancestors.
If they did then after only 33 generations they'd have 8 billion plus ancestors.
33 generations with 30 years per generation is less than 1000 years ago!
What happens is this - after only a few generations, increasing numbers of your grandparents turn out to be related, if only distantly...and they would have no way of knowing this either so it has little/nothing do to with insest.
Once any generations grandparents turn out to be related, the 2 to the xth equasion falls a part...
In fact at some unknowable point in anyone's ancestry, your number of ancestors begins to...DECREASE with each earlier generation.
There are other complications.... you only inherit your Y chromosome from your father, and his fathers father and so on.....so the 'indirect' male ancestors cannot contribute their male chromsome, however they can contribute their autosome.
Wally is certainly correct though, that people who take DNA tests may not understand all the subtleties of and admittedly complicated, if spectacularly informative, approach to geneology.
21st century = No geneology without genetics Wally. Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: It's AMAZING that one of the few benefits of chattel slavery was the formation of the African-American ethnic group from the myriad peoples brought over, only to have this undermined by African-Americans who are looking for a single ethnic group to identify with; "re-tribalization" it's called. This is disgraceful at best!
^^^^I'm sorry Wally, but this is pretty dumb. Pan Africanism is a failed attempt to covertly conform to the white/European concept of race. Each lineage/group/tribe in Africa is it's own race!!! When will you African Americans get off the "black" bandwagon and figure this out. You do all this studying of north and northeast Africans and never ask them what they THINK they are. Guess what? They will never say they are "black" so enough with the pan African nonesense(which is controleld by arabs by the way ) and let African Americans find out where they come from exactly so they can identify with what they are. That is not TRIBALISM that is IDENTITY!!!
Noone wants to identify themselves with African Americans because of the way you carry yourselves and that has nothing to do with tribalism. Whats up with the picketing in Washington DC of African Americans protesting Ethiopian business owners?!?!?! You never picketed the Koreans; now all the sudden you are mad that Ethiopians can circulate wealth within their community and expect them to except themselves as black or along side of you African American vagabonds?!?1 pppffft yeah right!!
Keep your self-hatred to yourself dude; no other African wants any part of it.
Posts: 271 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
They will never say they are "black" so enough with the pan African nonesense(which is controleld by arabs by the way ) and let African Americans find out where they come from exactly so they can identify with what they are. That is not TRIBALISM that is IDENTITY!!!
Being without a tribe is the beauty of being an Afro-American. My slave heritage has meant that my heritage is from many tribes.
People rarely identify with us because they are usually walking around on their knees waiting for the help of some European; while African Americans the lowest of the low, have been able to trive in this country and in many cases live on the same level of their former master or even higher. We got that from protesting and dying for our rights.
Yet I am very proud of the African leaders who refused to attack Mugabe of Zimbabwe--the only true African leader with the guts to try and make his coutry great for his people in the face of opposition from a bunch of "Uncle To'muses" controlled by the West through the Church.
As a Black American, descendant of slaves, I can be all of Africa and remain Afro-American. This has been why since DuBois and J.A. Rogers Black Americans have been in the forefront of writing the history of Blacks around the world.
The tribalism of many African groups limits their vision. This limited vision has led to Rwanda, Liberia and the Congo were Africans have treated other Africans terribly on the bases of tribal affiliation.
These tribal groups, like Black gang members in the United States, love only their tribal group members and thus are an enemy to unity.
Vidadavida you are a member of that white minority who try to manifest a policy of divide and rule herein. But some us refuse to play your game. We argue, but we will not let you lead us to death and destruction from advise that weakens, rather than strengthens Black people.
Your advise has always been the advise of some whites--may they be liberal or conservative, stay in your place. Your ilk tells us that if we write history write about slavery and the West African Kingdoms, only Europeans have the right and training to write about the history of any group they wish.
Sorry to tell you this we Black Americans have never played this role passively.That is why you constantly lambaste American Black scholars.
We feel, and have shown that the truth of ancient Black civilizations shall be discussed , elaborated and explained so the world will not be ignorant of all aspects relating to the history of Black people.
Pan-Africanism is the way to justice for all, and progress.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Being without a tribe is the beauty of being an Afro-American. My slave heritage has meant that my heritage is from many tribes.
To each his own I guess.
quote:People rarely identify with us because they are usually walking around on their knees waiting for the help of some European; while African Americans the lowest of the low, have been able to trive in this country and in many cases live on the same level of their former master or even higher. We got that from protesting and dying for our rights.
Not to start an argument, but you need to re-evaluate "thriving" and if anyone waits for whitey that would be African Americans..sorry. You do realize that your success is only because of white American succes right?
quote:Yet I am very proud of the African leaders who refused to attack Mugabe of Zimbabwe--the only true African leader with the guts to try and make his coutry great for his people in the face of opposition from a bunch of "Uncle To'muses" controlled by the West through the Church.
Umm very strange comment considering Mugabe is an evil despot who DOES NOT CARE ABOUT HIS PEOPLE OR COUNTRY hmmmmm.
quote:As a Black American, descendant of slaves, I can be all of Africa and remain Afro-American. This has been why since DuBois and J.A. Rogers Black Americans have been in the forefront of writing the history of Blacks around the world.
I'll agree here, but pseudo history and sensationalism isn't the best way to do that Clyde and it is done because of the lack of culture African Americans have. By the way Dubois was one of the most insulting of your leaders and is NOT someone African Americans should covet. He like most of your African American caste systems that were set up since slavery wanted mulattos/octoroons/quadroons/high yellows to rule over the darkies...LOOK IT UP!!!
quote:The tribalism of many African groups limits their vision. This limited vision has led to Rwanda, Liberia and the Congo were Africans have treated other Africans terribly on the bases of tribal affiliation.
So, you African Americans are the weakest stock of Africans and you don't seem to understand alot of things about life. You have been liberalized by white hippies and don't understand power and strength isn't "pretty" *shrugs*.
quote:Vidadavida you are a member of that white minority who try to manifest a policy of divide and rule herein. But some us refuse to play your game. We argue, but we will not let you lead us to death and destruction from advise that weakens, rather than strengthens Black people.
Oh lord I AM NOT WHITE DUDE!!!!! and what is sad is I am the main one that supports your weird ass on here. Thanks alot buddy.
quote:Your advise has always been the advise of some whites--may they be liberal or conservative, stay in your place. Your ilk tells us that if we write history write about slavery and the West African Kingdoms, only Europeans have the right and training to write about the history of any group they wish.
Whoa Whoa I have never mentioned anything about "only writting about slavery" stop lying Clyde and as far as West Africa..THAT IS WHERE YOU ARE FROM IDIOT!!!!!! Egypt and North African has nothing to do with you.
quote:Sorry to tell you this we Black Americans have never played this role passively.That is why you constantly lambaste American Black scholars.
Most African American Afrocentric scholars have done a poor job Clyde and that is not something I WANT.
quote:We feel, and have shown that the truth of ancient Black civilizations shall be discussed , elaborated and explained so the world will not be ignorant of all aspects relating to the history of Black people.
Persian, Sumerian, Olmec, Hawaiian, Japanese and Eskimo are ancient black histories or kingdoms? and relevant to African Americans how? Pan-Africanism is the way to justice for all, and progress.
To Neokem
Umm I am second generation American and both of my parents..yes both Father and Mother were millionaires by their late thirties so um no sir no jealousy here dude..sorry Posts: 271 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
If it was in America then it was african Americans that provided the environment for them to succeed.
And if it walks and quacks like a duck its a duck
vidadavida= "Hater"
What part of Africa are your parents from?
Let's evaluate that area today shall we?
West Africa And Africa Americans have dealt with slavery and colonization yet both are on the come up.
What exscuse does the rest of africa have for being 3rd world?
And by the way our success is because of us, we fought and died for this, every step of the way.
Under assault from every corner, and STILL survived and thrived.
Who you callin weak punk..step out your door and tell the first african american you see they are weak.
And whether not our scholars have done a poor job is up for debate..maybe..i dont think so..but where are you from again? what have your scholars added?
You a hater and a coward disrespecting my people and my ancestors.
Not to start an argument, but you need to re-evaluate "thriving" and if anyone waits for whitey that would be African Americans..sorry. You do realize that your success is only because of white American succes right?
Our success has not been due to white American success. We made the success for them.
There have been many wonderful whites that helped us to succeed in America, while many did not want to see us succeed. This country has prospered because of us. Every great invention that has made America great, worked only because of the Black man. Without us the world would still be in the dark, there would be no telephone or the internet.
I know you are not a Black because you don't know the history and the role Blacks have played here. You pretend to be African/Black but every chance you get you try to diminish the history of African and Black people.
You call Mugabe a despot. He is idealized by most African leaders because he has the nerve to seek to make his country a better place for Africans to live--and he stands up to the West. The West is against him because he dared to take away white previlege in Zimbabwe. Some of his people are against him because they are puppets of the Angelican Church.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: You call Mugabe a despot. He is idealized by most African leaders because he has the nerve to seek to make his country a better place for Africans to live--and he stands up to the West. The West is against him because he dared to take away white previlege in Zimbabwe. Some of his people are against him because they are puppets of the Angelican Church.
.
AMEEEEENNNN!!!!
LONG LIVE MUGABE, THE LION OF AFRICA!
LONG LIVE OUR BELOVED LEADER, LONG LIVE MUGABE!!! LONG LIVE!!
Posts: 2198 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Vidadavida, from the look and feel of your writings, Black you're most likely not. Too pretentious and superficial are your writings.
Pretending to be what you're not always comes out in the end. But in your case, the mirror of this pretention has been broken from the start.
Posts: 391 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Note that that the conflicts in Rwanda and Liberia were generated not by "tribal--strange term--affiliation" as you put it but by a Western engendered and introduced racism.
The Tutsis and Hutus in Rwanda speak the same language and got along with each other until the Belgians and Germans intervened in their communities and started measuring noses, heads and heights. In Liberia the problem had to do with the returnees and recaptives forming a caste society based on Western racism. The problems in the Congo have to do with its enormous natural wealth perpetually coveted by the West.
Note too that because Africans have travelled all over the African continent--the different ethnic groups have always picked up new people along the way. That's why within the larger ethnic groups people there is no standard look.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lamin: To Clyde Winters
Note that that the conflicts in Rwanda and Liberia were generated not by "tribal--strange term--affiliation" as you put it but by a Western engendered and introduced racism.
The Tutsis and Hutus in Rwanda speak the same language and got along with each other until the Belgians and Germans intervened in their communities and started measuring noses, heads and heights. In Liberia the problem had to do with the returnees and recaptives forming a caste society based on Western racism. The problems in the Congo have to do with its enormous natural wealth perpetually coveted by the West.
Note too that because Africans have travelled all over the African continent--the different ethnic groups have always picked up new people along the way. That's why within the larger ethnic groups people there is no standard look.
I agree. The problems in Liberia et al, reminds me of the South African supported movements in Namibia and Mozambique back in the day, and the present reactionary movements in Nigeria and Darfur which seem to be inspired by Oil interest.
This is what vidadavida tries to do. If you have followed her conversations she will jump from side to side (Black American vs African) to keep people divided. Yet when ever someone writes something that disputes white hegemony s/he is quick to the defense of ths status quo. This is one of the reasons I don't trust her.
There has never been a classical African/Negro. This is one of the reasons I like the Polish anthropologists use of the term "Black variety" back in the 1980's as a reference to African people.
Speaking of Polish anthropologists, I have read one of your books (Co-writer), and I was wondering why Polish anthropologists are expert or interested in this field -Ancient African history. There was also a famous Polish writer or photographer--I can't remember, but he past away few years ago, and he was on the news and they reported his work on Africa. Do you know this guy?
Posts: 2198 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
Speaking of Polish anthropologists, I have read one of your books (Co-writer), and I was wondering why Polish anthropologists are expert or interested in this field -Ancient African history. There was also a famous Polish writer or photographer--I can't remember, but he past away few years ago, and he was on the news and they reported his work on Africa. Do you know this guy?
I can't really explain this. But it may result from the fact that they were able to get research sites in Nubia during the Aswan Dam project; and they just decided to maintain contacts with researchers in the area.
quote:If it was in America then it was african Americans that provided the environment for them to succeed.
^^^^Losers always wanting credit for things they did not do *tisk* *tisk* keep dreaming hottentot!!
Clyde Winters says
quote: Our success has not been due to white American success. We made the success for them.
Another slavery built America rant *yawn*...support please?
quote:There have been many wonderful whites that helped us to succeed in America, while many did not want to see us succeed. This country has prospered because of us. Every great invention that has made America great, worked only because of the Black man. Without us the world would still be in the dark, there would be no telephone or the internet.
The internet?!?! Clyde what are you talking about?
quote: I know you are not a Black because you don't know the history and the role Blacks have played here. You pretend to be African/Black but every chance you get you try to diminish the history of African and Black people.
Another line of crap from the master eh Clyde. Aren't you the one that wants to deal with EVERYTHING but AFRICA?!?! You are the one that diminishes dude.
quote:You call Mugabe a despot. He is idealized by most African leaders because he has the nerve to seek to make his country a better place for Africans to live--and he stands up to the West. The West is against him because he dared to take away white previlege in Zimbabwe. Some of his people are against him because they are puppets of the Angelican Church.
No that is incorrect as usual the dude is a demon. Idi amin was demonized in the west but he truely WAS a hero getting all the cooleys and chinks out of power there. Your African American judgement of course stinks.
quote:This is what vidadavida tries to do. If you have followed her conversations she will jump from side to side (Black American vs African) to keep people divided. Yet when ever someone writes something that disputes white hegemony s/he is quick to the defense of ths status quo . This is one of the reasons I don't trust her
What do you mean by this and when have I ever defended whites?
Posts: 271 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by vidadavida: Umm I am second generation American and both of my parents..yes both Father and Mother were millionaires by their late thirties so um no sir no jealousy here dude..sorry
You little spoiled brat ... why don't you try becoming a millionaire yourselves.
Secondly, let play big bank take small bank ... their millions I probably make in six months ... lol.
Watch what you say because there's always someone around with a bigger d%$@.
Peace:o>)
Posts: 951 | From: where rules end and freedom begins | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
Speaking of Polish anthropologists, I have read one of your books (Co-writer), and I was wondering why Polish anthropologists are expert or interested in this field -Ancient African history. There was also a famous Polish writer or photographer--I can't remember, but he past away few years ago, and he was on the news and they reported his work on Africa. Do you know this guy?
They are no different in interest than any other country with an anthropology department. But some like to quote them a lot because with communism they fell behind other anthropological schools and maintained pseudoscientific raciological studies. Clyde loves to quote them because of that.
Posts: 354 | From: Atlanta, GA | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't know what you're talking about vida. Many northeast Africans say that they're black.
Posts: 603 | From: Mobile, Alabama | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Correct, there is no 'real' regional demarcation between "black Africans" and the light-skin coastal North Africans. Saharo-tropical Africans have long been resident in North Africa, and in fact, reflected in the gene pools of contemporary north Africans and in the skeletal remains of ancient North Africans. Even reactionary/'racialist' bio-anthropologists, like Groves, are aware of this reality...
"a wide sparsely populated region whose people are intermediate morphologically between “Caucasoid” and “Negroid”. While the late and terminal Pleistocene populations of northern Africa were noticeably more robust than their present-day descendants (as were those of Europe), like them they were differentiated into more northerly “Caucasoid” and more southerly “Negroid” morphologies. **Yet the transition between these two geographic forms was much further north in the terminal Pleistocene than today**; the terminal Pleistocene Nubians and the Asselar skull are as “Negroid” as are the modern Teita of Kenya; the intermediates were the people of Afalou-bou-Rhummel in Algeria." - Groves
To which I, of course, replied...
My take:
This is quite telling, the idea that the so-called transition from “Negroid” to “Caucasoid” characteristics in African populations was much “further north” in the late Pleistocene, than is supposedly the case today. Yet, Groves does not indicate where this break in the said characteristics lie in that transitional belt.
You see how it corresponds with what I have demonstrated earlier; 2parents, 4 grandparents, 8 great grandparents - and why White folks, having these records, have little or no problem in tracing their ancestry. They don't have to talk about Y chromosomes and mtDna, they KNOW that "David Evans was their great-great grandfather on their father's side of the family" and that the previous generation would show 16 great-great-great grandparents and so on, back to the 1700 years; NO science existing today can tell us that; I'm simply advising African-Americans to save their money until there is one or simply glory in the fact that they are descendants of Africans from all over the continent...
Posts: 3344 | From: Berkeley | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
You see how it corresponds with what I have demonstrated earlier; 2parents, 4 grandparents, 8 great grandparents
^ Yes, in most cases, but in all cases the formula will soon fail within a few generations.
Not to harp on it, but it's crucial to understand that one of the most amazing findings of modern genetics is just how *few* descrete lineages there are, and how they typically overlap, in populations.
90% of the male population of Europe is either R1b, I [native European], G, J [southwest asian] or E3b [african].
^ So it really *isn't* the case that peoples are descendant from unkowable thousands of distinct ancestors within a generation.
Some genetic studies indicate that the entire -non African population - Chinese, Australian Aborigines, Germans, are descendant from a small pool of as few as several dozens of East Africans from 60kya~.
And that's just their 'common-bottleneck', not to mention several others that have followed and allow them to be genetically distinguished from each other.
quote: and why White folks, having these records, have little or no problem in tracing their ancestry. They don't have to talk about Y chromosomes and mtDna, they KNOW that "David Evans was their great-great grandfather on their father's side of the family"
Funny then, that they make up most of the 'customers' for DNA testing.
Moreover, white Americans have frequently discoverd their ancestry isn't, uhm...as white as they expected.
quote: and that the previous generation would show 16 great-great-great grandparents and so on back to the 1700 years;
Actually it's worse than that....science isn't going to pin point the identity of *any* of your grandparents within a few generations unless you have 'their' dna to compare with.
Remember Wally, a typical Y chromosome marker, such as E3b1 of gamma cluster found in Oromo of Ethiopia goes back several -thousand- years.
DNA is best at dealing with groups and allowing for inferences over long periods of time.
quote:I'm simply advising African-Americans to save their money until there is one or simply glory in the fact that they are descendants of Africans from all over the continent
I don't know. Your view is valid.
But here is mine:
I view genetics and it's relationship to socialogy - including our understanding of history - as akin to gunpowder and it's relationship to warfare.
I advise learning how to use this tool, less you allow it to be aimed at you with impunity, and to devastating effect, whether you are "impressed" with it, or not. Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Heraldry geneaolgy can give putative names of remote ancestors. What it can't tell is who jumped the fence.
That white cat who knows the name of his legal paternal lineage greatgrandfather doesn't know that his greatgrandmother slipped Jody the Rider through the bedroom window once or twice.
NRY shows Jody was really Greatgranpa not the dude Greatgranmama was married to (always wondered why that boy don't quite really resemble nobody else in the family).
Back in those days doctors had all kinds of maternal impression excuses to help the adultress hold her marriage and family intact.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
You see how it corresponds with what I have demonstrated earlier; 2parents, 4 grandparents, 8 great grandparents
^ Yes, in most cases, but in all cases the formula will soon fail within a few generations.
Not to harp on it, but it's crucial to understand that one of the most amazing findings of modern genetics is just how *few* descrete lineages there are, and how they typically overlap, in populations.
90% of the male population of Europe is either R1b, I [native European], G, J [southwest asian] or E3b [african].
^ So it really *isn't* the case that peoples are descendant from unkowable thousands of distinct ancestors within a generation.
Some genetic studies indicate that the entire -non African population - Chinese, Australian Aborigines, Germans, are descendant from a small pool of as few as several dozens of East Africans from 60kya~.
And that's just their 'common-bottleneck', not to mention several others that have followed and allow them to be genetically distinguished from each other.
quote: and why White folks, having these records, have little or no problem in tracing their ancestry. They don't have to talk about Y chromosomes and mtDna, they KNOW that "David Evans was their great-great grandfather on their father's side of the family"
Funny then, that they make up most of the 'customers' for DNA testing.
Moreover, white Americans have frequently discoverd their ancestry isn't, uhm...as white as they expected.
quote: and that the previous generation would show 16 great-great-great grandparents and so on back to the 1700 years;
Actually it's worse than that....science isn't going to pin point the identity of *any* of your grandparents within a few generations unless you have 'their' dna to compare with.
Remember Wally, a typical Y chromosome marker, such as E3b1 of gamma cluster found in Oromo of Ethiopia goes back several -thousand- years.
DNA is best at dealing with groups and allowing for inferences over long periods of time.
quote:I'm simply advising African-Americans to save their money until there is one or simply glory in the fact that they are descendants of Africans from all over the continent
I don't know. Your view is valid.
But here is mine:
I view genetics and it's relationship to socialogy - including our understanding of history - as akin to gunpowder and it's relationship to warfare.
I advise learning how to use this tool, less you allow it to be aimed at you with impunity, and to devastating effect, whether you are "impressed" with it, or not.
VERY VERY VERY GOOD POST RASOL!!!!!!!
Posts: 271 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Let us not over intellectualize this to the point where the message is lost:
Let us be conservative, rather than having 1,024 ancestors in 1707, let us just simply have only 100 from Africa. Now, given our knowledge of the African slave trade, these 100 ancestors of yours were certainly NOT from one ethnic group or even one geographical location; an Igbo man and a Taureg woman are sold to Mr. Jenkins, this Igbo man is then mated with a Songhai woman, and the Taureg woman mated to a Yoruba, at Mr. Jenkins plantation - and this is just ONE branch of your ancestors and this was the TYPICAL way that slaves were paired up. So from this simple sale, your ancestry is Igbo, Taureg, Songhai, and Yoruba. Any scientific discipline worthy of its claim should then be able to tell you the ancestry of EACH and EVERYONE of those folks that came together over time that resulted in YOU. It's no more complicated than that, there is none...
Posts: 3344 | From: Berkeley | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
But as Supe and Rasol pointed out, NRY and mtDNA genes are usually preserved. Let's say you have a Songhai man. That man will carry the same lineage as his forefathers. His sons will carry the same lineage on down. The same is true with mtDNA in females.
Also note, how many African Americans have European paternal ancestry and the converse-- European Americans with African maternal ancestry.
Posts: 26267 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
) and let African Americans find out where they come from exactly so they can identify with what they are. That is not TRIBALISM that is IDENTITY!!!![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic