quote:Originally posted by rainingburntice: "GOD DAYYUM, BOY YOU STUPID!!!!!!!!
BTW if E1b1a people domesticated Sorghum and Millet in West Africa, why doesn't proto-Niger Congo (whose speakers have the highest and most diverse E1b1a) have any linguistic reconstructions dealing with agriculture?"
-beyoku
Do you call everyone stupid that you can't refute? I realize that it's second nature for bozo's like you to call people stupid who make you aware of facts you just can't seem to face, but I can't help you with that, go see a shrink! By the way, no language group owns any particular haplogroup 'genius'! And some actually consider Nilo-Saharan Languages as a descendant of Niger-Congo. What's so impossible about E1b1a being linked to West African Neolithic cultures?
DAYUM BOY YOU DUMB!!!!!!!!!
I have see it all............First you are going to take some of my own personal writings, recycle them down to a soundbyte and then try to argue it against me. There is nothing to refute because I would arguing with myself. Where do you think you got your information from???
Since I actually wrote what you are talking about I know all the caveats and the details. But if you are really well read on these ideas then you are going to have to explain how E1b1a "West Africans" are practicing agriculture yet the descendats of E1b1a "West Africans" have no agriculture terms in their proto language. You are also going to have to explain how E1b1a "Nilo-Saharans" in West African can migrate East and leave little no NO trace in the contemporary Nilo-Saharan descendants.... particularly the CORE Nilotic inhabitants of the Upper Nile. Please explain how your idea is supported by MTDNA lineage and or Autosomal evidence?
Good luck.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
I have see it all............First you are going to take some of my own personal writings, recycle them down to a soundbyte and then try to argue it against me. There is nothing to refute because I would arguing with myself. Where do you think you got your information from???
Since I actually wrote what you are talking about I know all the caveats and the details. But if you are really well read on these ideas then you are going to have to explain how E1b1a "West Africans" are practicing agriculture yet the descendats of E1b1a "West Africans" have no agriculture terms in their proto language. You are also going to have to explain how E1b1a "Nilo-Saharans" in West African can migrate East and leave little no NO trace in the contemporary Nilo-Saharan descendants.... particularly the CORE Nilotic inhabitants of the Upper Nile. Please explain how your idea is supported by MTDNA lineage and or Autosomal evidence?"
-beyoku
Despite all this babbling you still haven't refuted anything. My original statement still stands-no language group owns any particular haplogroup. And anyone migrating from West Africa is bound to have E1b1a no matter what language they are speaking. The frequency of E1b1a back then was overrum by E1b1b pastoralists just like every other Y Hg. Because of this E1b1a most likely didn't make up much of Ancient Egyptian DNA. Actually the E1b1a in Rameses III most likely had a Nubian source since from the 12th Dynasty on they were in control there.
Posts: 171 | From: Florida | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Not outright, but that's where you were tacitly going with it, until I stopped your fallacy dead in its tracks."
-Swenet
Don't try to convince yourself that you're a pyschic now! LOL! Remember your just a hacker that lives in front of the computer 24 hrs a day nothing more, and also that your opinions are not shared by Egyptologists, who believe that the ancient Egyptians are the same as modern ones. If not then why aren't the modern Egyptians mostly Y Hg J like the Arabs, Assyrians, and Hyksos? If you think these people were bringing in Hg E1b1b then you're hopeless!
Frank Yurco, "An Egyptological Review" in Mary R. Lefkowitz and Guy MacLean Rogers, eds. Black Athena Revisited. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1996.
Posts: 171 | From: Florida | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Refute WHAT exactly? There is nothing to refute! If E1b1a represent a Nubian lineage in Egypt please explain the lack of E1b1a in contemporary Nubians!
If E1b1a is Sudanese please explain the greater frequency of E1b1a lineages in Egypt vs that of Sudan where they seem totally absent?
You theory has HOLES because you didnt create it. You probably waiting on ABF to come back... hitting refresh over and over so you can swagger-jack the rest?
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rainingburntice: "If E1b1a represent a Nubian lineage in Egypt please explain the lack of E1b1a in contemporary Nubians!"
-beyoku
E1b1a is more common in the Hausa than in Egyptians!
Hausa are NOT Nubians. Hausa are NOT even Ethnic Sudanese.
Hausa....like the Fulani in Sudan have only been there from a few hundred years at best. Both Ethnicities represent VERY recent migration from Western Africa. WTF are you talking about?
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I absolve myself from this discussion with Acid-Rain, until it says something that justifies stepping in and rediculing it again. I suspect this will happen soon, since Acid-Rain is dumber than a rock.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Hausa....like the Fulani in Sudan have only been there from a few hundred years at best. Both Enicities represent VERY recent migration from Western Africa."
-beyoku
Yes, Sudan has had very recent migrations that have changed the genetic landscape there (Hg J 74-17%) but not in Egypt that's the whole point-this is also what you keep avoiding! MODERN EGYPT IS THE SAME AS THE ANCIENTS! Did it sink in yet! Your opinion of a population replacement is not supported by the very genetic evidence you are also using. E1b1a would originally have been more common in Sudan than in Egypt before the influx because the Sahel allows more migration than would a desert. If you look at a map of the spread of the Early Neolithic from the oldest pottery in Mali 9400 BC you can see that it spreads to the east and then shows up at Nabta Playa(Egypt)7000 BC. Tell me your not that slow! It would also help if you had more than a GED!
Posts: 171 | From: Florida | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
"I absolve myself from this discussion with Acid-Rain, until it says something that justifies stepping in and rediculing it again. I suspect this will happen soon, since Acid-Rain is dumber than a rock."
-Swenet
Is this how you're going to snake your way out of confronting this:
"If not then why aren't the modern Egyptians mostly Y Hg J like the Arabs, Assyrians, and Hyksos? If you think these people were bringing in Hg E1b1b then you're hopeless!"
You don't like that genetic evidence when when it goes against your opinions do you?
Posts: 171 | From: Florida | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Is this how you're going to snake your way out of confronting this:
You're too dumb too read. What I said was that the prospect of Egyptians inheriting E1b1b from certain Arabs and Levantines was greater than the prospect that they inherited it from Nilo-Saharans. Maybe you're not discerning enough to know the difference between what you're ascribing to me, and what I actually said, but that's your problem, not mine.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rainingburntice: "Yet they carry R lineages associated with Eurasians even though some of them carry downstream markers not found in Europe and it turns out Cameroonians show a high frequency of underived R1*."
-Djehuti
Where in you're head did this idea crawl out of? They were R-V88 not R1*.
"So either these clades are not Eurasian OR they arose in Eurasians who didn't look any different from the Africans who never left the continent when they back-migrated to Africa."
-Djehuti
Those people that are haplogroup R-V88 in sub-Saharan Africa were at least 90% mtDNA Hg L they're not the same as the people that migrated from Eurasia in the Holocene.
R1* is found in Cameroonians and other Central Africans as well as R-V88. These findings were discussed in past threads and I'm too lazy at the moment to direct you to them, so I suggest you find them on your own. R1* in Africa has been shown to have it's highest frequency in West Africa and second to that in Egypt. Outside of Africa, R1* has it's highest frequency in Oman.
And then there is also hg T which is dispersed throughout East Africa with it's highest frequency in the Horn, particularly in Djibouti and Somalia, yet is rare in Arabia. In fact, the greatest frequency of T in Eurasia is in northeast India. hg K is also found in low levels throughout East Africa.
By the way, like Keita I question the semantics of the 'Eurasian' label for these clades even if they originated in Southwest Asia. Southwest Asia is right next to Africa and judging from the skeletal remains, the peoples in which these clades developed did not look any different from the Africans next door. So the division between 'Eurasian' and 'African' rather subjective don't you think?
Posts: 26285 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: MODERN EGYPT IS THE SAME AS THE ANCIENTS! Did it sink in yet! Your opinion of a population replacement is not supported by the very genetic evidence you are also using. ! [/QB]
Please then explain the similarities between this:
quote:Originally posted by the lyinass: And why would Libya not be part of Mahgreb genetics?
Modern Libya is part of the Maghreb, but the Libyan deserts of western Egypt is NOT you moron. Even modern Libyans, particularly the east and southeast show more affinities with northeast Africa than with the Maghreb, but of course you are ignorant about all this.
Posts: 26285 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
"R1* is found in Cameroonians and other Central Africans as well as R-V88. These findings were discussed in past threads and I'm too lazy at the moment to direct you to them, so I suggest you find them on your own. R1* in Africa has been shown to have it's highest frequency in West Africa and second to that in Egypt. Outside of Africa, R1* has it's highest frequency in Oman."
And then there is also hg T which is dispersed throughout East Africa with it's highest frequency in the Horn, particularly in Djibouti and Somalia, yet is rare in Arabia. In fact, the greatest frequency of T in Eurasia is in northeast India. hg K is also found in low levels throughout East Africa.
-Djehuti
The R1* of the earlier studies has now been shown to be R-V88. And that's why you're "too lazy" to cite the sources. India has the highest frequency of Hg T anywhere not just Eurasia. Hg T is known to have originated in the Middle East and spread from that region to India and the Horn.
"By the way, like Keita I question the semantics of the 'Eurasian' label for these clades even if they originated in Southwest Asia. Southwest Asia is right next to Africa and judging from the skeletal remains, the peoples in which these clades developed did not look any different from the Africans next door. So the division between 'Eurasian' and 'African' rather subjective don't you think?"
-Djehuti
They are Eurasian clades because they developed in isolation from the lineages of Africa, and the skeletal evidence shows that these people were different from the people of Africa at the times in question. Otherwise they could not be distiguished as Proto-Mediterraneans if they were all the same. There could not have been any close relationship skeletally with Eurasians and Africans since other than the OOA migration 65ka ago there was only one other significant migration from that region which was much later in time c. 9000 BC, the migration of the Harifian culture which is the source of the E-M78 lineages in the Levant.
Posts: 171 | From: Florida | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Please then explain the similarities between this...and this..."
-beyoku
You can't use the autosomal DNA evidence of a few pharoahs and claim that their was a complete population replacement of the entire country. That's very elementary of you! Besides Y and X lineages are independent of any autosomal alleles. Also, no matter what migration it was that brought E1b1a to East Africa the fact remains it came from the west either from the Early Neolithic or even the Bantu migration the highest frequency and DIVERSITY of E-V38 is found in West Africa.
Posts: 171 | From: Florida | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
"You're too dumb too read. What I said was that the prospect of Egyptians inheriting E1b1b from certain Arabs and Levantines was greater than the prospect that they inherited it from Nilo-Saharans."
-Swenet
I'm not even talking about that. I was referring to your theory of a population replacement of Egypt. Since the modern populations of Egypt have at least 65% of Hg E and you claim that invading armies (where male lineages would have predominated) have changed the genetic landscape, why does Hg J have such a low frequency. The fact is, is that the modern phylogeny of Egypt disproves a population replacement! All the lineages that are there now except for the modern Hg J lineages have been there since ancient times!
Posts: 171 | From: Florida | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rainingburntice: "Please then explain the similarities between this...and this..."
-beyoku
You can't use the autosomal DNA evidence of a few pharoahs and claim that their was a complete population replacement of the entire country. That's very elementary of you! Besides Y and X lineages are independent of any autosomal alleles. Also, no matter what migration it was that brought E1b1a to East Africa the fact remains it came from the west either from the Early Neolithic or even the Bantu migration the highest frequency and DIVERSITY of E-V38 is found in West Africa.
I have never argued about a population replacement. I have done my OWN RESEARCH that would argue a change in demographics over time as the least controversial event. That said, you are still doing sloppy research due to lack of reading and lack of real interest in the subject. You are recycling things I wrote YEARS ago. That is why I asked you some SPECIFIC questions - Explain these 5 points:
-Explain the differences between the Autosomal profiles of so far 9 Mummies who have autosomes that CANNOT be found in Modern Egypt...........Unless you are matching them with sub Saharan refugees IN Egypt.
-If E1b1a represent a Nubian lineage in Egypt please explain the lack of E1b1a in contemporary Nubians.
-If E1b1a is Sudanese please explain the greater frequency of E1b1a lineages in Egypt vs that of Sudan where they seem totally absent?
-Explain how E1b1a "West Africans" are practicing agriculture yet the descendants of E1b1a "West Africans" have no agriculture terms in their proto language.
-Explain how E1b1a "Nilo-Saharans" in West African can migrate East and leave little no NO trace in the contemporary Nilo-Saharan descendants.... particularly the CORE Nilotic inhabitants of the Upper Nile.
5 simple questions, if you have hypothesized migrations of E1b1a from West Africa to Egypt and you spout off about Sorghum and Millet then you should already have this figured out. Remember, You are the one who brought up mythical west Asian MTDNA lineages in Egypt. Non-African influence in the Nile Valley for the most part is simply and afterthought. You are not going to get these answers by fumbling through wikipedia.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rainingburntice: I'm not even talking about that. I was referring to your theory of a population replacement of Egypt. Since the modern populations of Egypt have at least 65% of Hg E
You're not making sense right now. The markers employed by Lucotte et al are not that reliable, and even assuming the picture they unveil are representative for the Y chromosomes they correlate with, there are many scenario's envisonable in which uniparental lineages themselves aren't even representative of a given population's true genetic composition.
If we take these haplotypes at face value, there should be more than ~33% Sub Saharan genome-wide contributions in Lower Egyptians (I'm not counting mtDNA lineages), of which almost everything should be non-West and non-Central African (the E lineages you're talking about in Lower Egypt are overwhelmingly East African). Corroborate this laughable insinuation that you're making right now with genome-wide DNA results for cosmopolitan Lower Egyptians. They don't exist, stupid.
quote:Originally posted by rainingburntice: why does Hg J have such a low frequency.
J is not low in Egypt, and J is not the only marker that tracks Middle Eastern gene flow. Restricting your tunnel vision to J, so you can make the Modern Egyptian paternal y-chromosomes less Eurasian isn't going to cut it. Additionally, there are many Egyptian Y chromosome samples that have profiles that are similar enough to Eurasians that they could easily be mistaken to actually CONSTITUTE a profile of some Eurasian population:
posted
"The markers employed by Lucotte et al are not that reliable...there should be more than...of which almost everything should be..."
-Swenet
No, let's not do this. I'm not going to argue about what should be or your opinions on data reliability. The evidence (studies) are the final word unless it is outdated. This is why you FAIL! You're so full of yourself you can't accept the evidence!
"...and J is not the only marker that tracks Middle Eastern gene flow."
-Swenet
Most of the Hg G is Neolithic because the Middle Eastern populations that had invaded Egypt post-Hyksos are now low in this haplogroup. And Hg T is known to have been present since the Mesolithic. The Hg R-V88 is also pre-Neolithic. And just to remind you once again modern scholarship DOES NOT side with your fringe theory of replacement, but with population continuity!
Posts: 171 | From: Florida | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Explain the differences between the Autosomal profiles of so far 9 Mummies who have autosomes that CANNOT be found in Modern Egypt...........Unless you are matching them with sub Saharan refugees IN Egypt."
-beyoku
Again I'm citing X and Y chromosomal DNA evidence you can't use autosomal DNA data to nullify such evidence. The two are independent of each other.
"If E1b1a represent a Nubian lineage in Egypt please explain the lack of E1b1a in contemporary Nubians...If E1b1a is Sudanese please explain the greater frequency of E1b1a lineages in Egypt vs that of Sudan where they seem totally absent?"
-beyoku
First of all when I said it had Nubian origins I was refering to the time period of Rameses III, Sudan has had much more immigration from many sources that you cannot use it as a representative population of the 20th Dynasty. That's why Egypt has a very low but still discernable frequency because Egypt now is the same as it has been since the Neolithic.
"Explain how E1b1a "West Africans" are practicing agriculture yet the descendants of E1b1a "West Africans" have no agriculture terms in their proto language...Explain how E1b1a "Nilo-Saharans" in West African can migrate East and leave little no NO trace in the contemporary Nilo-Saharan descendants.... particularly the CORE Nilotic inhabitants of the Upper Nile."
-beyoku
Again I said anyone migrating from West Africa would be carrying E1b1a lineages I never said they should be the majority. From, Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies-Jared Diamond:
"Putting together direct archaeological evidence of crops with the more indirect linguistic evidence, we deduce that the people who were domesticating sorghum and millet in the Sahara thousands of years ago spoke languages ancestral to modern Nilo-Saharan languages."
Posts: 171 | From: Florida | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rainingburntice: No, let's not do this. I'm not going to argue about what should be or your opinions on data reliability.
These are not my opinions, you numb skulled airhead. These are well known caveats.
quote:Originally posted by rainingburntice: This is why you FAIL! You're so full of yourself you can't accept the evidence!
If putting you in your place where the inconsistencies of some RFLP haplotype studies are concerned, particularly, your interpretation of them and what implications you erringly think they have for NRY J in modern Egypt, means being full of oneself to you, then you need to get your brainpan looked at.
quote:Originally posted by rainingburntice: Again I'm citing X and Y chromosomal DNA evidence
You haven't cited X chromosome evidence, unless your dumbass thinks mtDNA resides on the X chromosome (and your dumbass obviously does).
quote:Originally posted by rainingburntice: Most of the Hg G is Neolithic because the Middle Eastern populations that had invaded Egypt post-Hyksos are now low in this haplogroup.
This would make sense IF you'd be able to point out that the frequency of NRY G is extraordinary high in modern Egypt, and IF you'd be able to demonstrate that G was low in Middle Eastern population in periods immediately after the Hyksos New Kingdom en Late Dynastic Egypt.
quote:And Hg T is known to have been present since the Mesolithic.
According to what evidence?
quote:The Hg R-V88 is also pre-Neolithic.
Indeed. Too bad for your dumbass its frequency is marginal in Nile Valley Egypt.
quote:And just to remind you once again modern scholarship DOES NOT side with your fringe theory of replacement, but with population continuity!
It does side with my views. You're just too much of an airhead to understand the scholarship you speak of and too much of disgruntled Euronut to accept whatever bits of truth you do comprehend (which is next to nothing).
The Maghrebi componant detected by Henn et al 2012 is the only Upper Palaeolithic signal in Northern Africa, and its low in Egyptian Berbers, let alone Nile Valley Egyptians. The rest (shown below as colors other than light blue) represent way more recent admixture events that undermine your retarded Ancient Egypt = Modern Egypt fantasies:
^If my notion of population replacement, whether gradual or in otherwise, for a large portion of the Egyptian populace is so unsupported, explain these results. Other than their Maghrebi componant, which is ~20% in Modern Egyptians, where is the rest of their autosomal Upper Palaeolithic signal? Egypt was populated since way the light blue portion of their ancestry entered Northern Africa, and they have African mtDNA lineages to support this. Why was Henn et al 2012 unable to pick up on this segment of their genome? Explain, numbskull!
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rainingburntice: "Explain the differences between the Autosomal profiles of so far 9 Mummies who have autosomes that CANNOT be found in Modern Egypt...........Unless you are matching them with sub Saharan refugees IN Egypt."
-beyoku
Again I'm citing X and Y chromosomal DNA evidence you can't use autosomal DNA data to nullify such evidence. The two are independent of each other.
"If E1b1a represent a Nubian lineage in Egypt please explain the lack of E1b1a in contemporary Nubians...If E1b1a is Sudanese please explain the greater frequency of E1b1a lineages in Egypt vs that of Sudan where they seem totally absent?"
-beyoku
First of all when I said it had Nubian origins I was refering to the time period of Rameses III, Sudan has had much more immigration from many sources that you cannot use it as a representative population of the 20th Dynasty. That's why Egypt has a very low but still discernable frequency because Egypt now is the same as it has been since the Neolithic.
"Explain how E1b1a "West Africans" are practicing agriculture yet the descendants of E1b1a "West Africans" have no agriculture terms in their proto language...Explain how E1b1a "Nilo-Saharans" in West African can migrate East and leave little no NO trace in the contemporary Nilo-Saharan descendants.... particularly the CORE Nilotic inhabitants of the Upper Nile."
-beyoku
Again I said anyone migrating from West Africa would be carrying E1b1a lineages I never said they should be the majority. From, Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies-Jared Diamond:
"Putting together direct archaeological evidence of crops with the more indirect linguistic evidence, we deduce that the people who were domesticating sorghum and millet in the Sahara thousands of years ago spoke languages ancestral to modern Nilo-Saharan languages."
You are a Jackasss! You didnt even explain anything. You are supposed to break it down with specific knowledge not give some once sentence soundbytes you dirty mallet. You are not explaining the circumstances behind the presence of E1b1a in Egypt and its total absence in Sudan.....yet you argue the presence of E1b1a in ANCIENT Egypt is due to Sudanese Migrants! Tomfoolery. You have not EXPLAINED the migration of West African farmers into Sudan yet the disconnect between farming and the West Africans that migrated south.
Create a intelligent coherent argument. Put some length into it. You dont even need to source it just go off the top of your head. Your whole post was just to obfuscate....you should be attempting to CLARIFY.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rainingburntice: -Djehuti
The R1* of the earlier studies has now been shown to be R-V88. And that's why you're "too lazy" to cite the sources. India has the highest frequency of Hg T anywhere not just Eurasia. Hg T is known to have originated in the Middle East and spread from that region to India and the Horn.
WRONG! R-V88 a.k.a. R1b1c is a branch of R1b and thus is NOT the same as underived ancestral R1* or even R* both of which were found in Cameroon!! Again, this was discussed before.
As for hg T, India has the highest frequency in Eurasia occurring only in a few select areas of the subcontinent. hg T occurs in the Horn in a broader area.
Even if both hg R and T originated in Southwest Asia, it is right next door to Africa and did so among populations who looked not much different from Africans!
quote:-Djehuti
They are Eurasian clades because they developed in isolation from the lineages of Africa, and the skeletal evidence shows that these people were different from the people of Africa at the times in question. Otherwise they could not be distiguished as Proto-Mediterraneans if they were all the same. There could not have been any close relationship skeletally with Eurasians and Africans since other than the OOA migration 65ka ago there was only one other significant migration from that region which was much later in time c. 9000 BC, the migration of the Harifian culture which is the source of the E-M78 lineages in the Levant.
LOL What do you mean developed in "isolation from the lineages of Africa"?!! ALL Eurasian lineages are DERIVED from African ones because that is where the human species originated, silly!! As for skeletal evidence showing any difference, exactly what evidence do you speak of??! Last time I checked all the skeletal evidence especially that in Southwest Asia, and particularly Arabia from which the alleged back-migration took place is NO different from that of Africans in that they are tropically adapted and even display so-called 'negroid' craniofacial form!! As for 'proto-Mediterranean', you do realize that Mediterranean proto or not is an invalid classification as all racial groups are. Proto-Mediterraneans were even postulated to originate IN Africa as per all the old authors who coined the term like Sergi, Seligman, and Smith! Even hardcore racists like Carletoon Coon admitted that 'proto-Mediterraneans' had "negroid tendancies"! LMAO
I suggest you take your confused ass here.
Posts: 26285 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Don't think Acid-Rain will rear its head again, until more results come out that gets its panties up in a bunch. Yep, that's when these fartheads typically come out of their hiding.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
"ALL Eurasian lineages are DERIVED from African"
I thought you and Swenet, I'm sorry "mindovermatter", claimed it was only the Europeans that were derived? Weren't the Asian and African suppose to be underived "fundamental units"? lol
Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ LOL Speaking of fartheads rearing up out of their asses.
Anguishedofbeingdumb, welcome back. Though I see you still have Bowcock in your brain, not surprisingly. Let me break it down for you. ALL Eurasians are derived from Africa yes, because that is where humans originated. However in the case of Europeans, they show ADMIXTURE because not only do they have their own indigenous Eurasian lineages but recent ones that developed in Africa after their own Eurasian ones. We all know your real problem with this FACT is this means Euros like yourself have African admixture which bothers you greatly.
Posts: 26285 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Exactly. See my post. These fartheads usually only come out of hiding to attack already established facts. Lo and behold, no more then 8 minutes after I submit that post, angstofbeingab!tch confirms the accuracy of what I said, by coming out of hiding to defend the thing that has been bugging her since the early days of ES.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
And what "established fact" did I deny Mindless?
"However in the case of Europeans, they show ADMIXTURE because not only do they have their own indigenous Eurasian lineages but recent ones that developed in Africa after their own Eurasian ones."
Same with Asians dumbass. lol
Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Sucking is what he's good at, not thinking. LOL
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeingdumb: And what "established fact" did I deny Mindless?
"However in the case of Europeans, they show ADMIXTURE because not only do they have their own indigenous Eurasian lineages but recent ones that developed in Africa after their own Eurasian ones."
Same with Asians dumbass. lol
Exactly what is the same as Asians?? The E lineages you Euros have, or the African HLA markers? Or would that be the Benin HBS (sickle cell)??! LMAO Pray tell what Asian population carries those genetic traits indicative of recent African ancestry??
Posts: 26285 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: Originally posted by Anguishofbeing: And what "established fact" did I deny Mindless?
^Suck it easy, son!
LOL Mindless I so missed your tongue tying BS about incoming Asians mixing with Africans or was it Europeans with Asian genes mixing with Chinese looking Asian samples...whatever. lol
Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ It's simple. Europeans ARE Asians as Europe is no more a continent than India. However unlike Indians or other Asians they have recent African admixture.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeingdumb: And what "established fact" did I deny Mindless?
"However in the case of Europeans, they show ADMIXTURE because not only do they have their own indigenous Eurasian lineages but recent ones that developed in Africa after their own Eurasian ones."
Same with Asians dumbass. lol
Exactly what is the same as Asians?? The E lineages you Euros have, or the African HLA markers? Or would that be the Benin HBS (sickle cell)??! LMAO Pray tell what Asian population carries those genetic traits indicative of recent African ancestry??
Answer my question above, why don't you?
Posts: 26285 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeh, Asians have no recent African admixture because after Africans initially populated Asia they never went back there. lol Jackass.
Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Angstofbeingabitch always uses sarcasm as a ploy to hide her glaring inability to present hard data.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeingstupid: Yeh, Asians have no recent African admixture because after Africans initially populated Asia they never went back there. lol Jackass.
Sarcasm aside, 'Asians' comprise a large geographic group. We know Southwest Asians have been affected by recent African admixture, but in the case of east Asians like Chinese whom YOU brought up, is there evidence of such??
Posts: 26285 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Oh so now when your BS becomes too obvious you want to chop up separate "Asians" and "Asians". How very fuking scientific. HAHHAHAHAHA Is this willy nilly approach part of the "hard data" technique mindless spoke about. lol!!!! Priceless...
Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ LOL And exactly what b.s. are you referring too, you foaming mouth idiot?! What is so unscientific about "chopping up Asians". The label 'Asian' is based on the geographical term Asia.
Asia
Of course Europe is really part of Asia as well but Europeans (your folks) were the ones who sought to separate themselves from the rest of the continent and thus 'chop' themselves away. Of course modern geneticists like Sforza and Keita know such a division is merely political and does not reflect reality.
The reality is Europeans are Asians but received recent African admixture. The same is true with Southwest Asia. Both Europe and Southwest Asia are adjacent to Africa which is why their admixture is not surprising.
Now begone, buggered b|tch
Posts: 26285 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
don't even reply to anguishofbeing. He is an attention whore with zero information to contribute
Posts: 42937 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Pray tell what Asian population carries those genetic traits indicative of recent African ancestry??" - Mary
"We know Southwest Asians have been affected by recent African admixture" - Mary
^^LOL!!!
Every time you try to cover your ass (for five fuking years!) you tie yourself in another knot. The more you reply is the more you expand your encyclopedia of fuk up statements Mary. Take Lioness' advice and ignore me, or do like mindlessovermatter and change your account name when the sht becomes too embarrassing. lol
Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: don't even reply to anguishofbeing. He is an attention whore with zero information to contribute
LOL I realize that when the fool began to pollute my thread on ancient Egyptian marriage with his nonsense.
He is a whore alright, but I bet it's more than just attention when he's not trolling this forum and creeping in mens bathroom stalls.
Posts: 26285 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: The Maghrebi componant detected by Henn et al 2012 is the only Upper Palaeolithic signal in Northern Africa, and its low in Egyptian Berbers, let alone Nile Valley Egyptians. The rest (shown below as colors other than light blue) represent way more recent admixture events that undermine your retarded Ancient Egypt = Modern Egypt fantasies:
^If my notion of population replacement, whether gradual or in otherwise, for a large portion of the Egyptian populace is so unsupported, explain these results. Other than their Maghrebi componant, which is ~20% in Modern Egyptians, where is the rest of their autosomal Upper Palaeolithic signal? Egypt was populated since way the light blue portion of their ancestry entered Northern Africa, and they have African mtDNA lineages to support this. Why was Henn et al 2012 unable to pick up on this segment of their genome? Explain, numbskull!
Would I be correct in guessing that the green color in those graphs represents Arab ancestry that can be dated in large part to the Islamic conquests (at least for Egypt)?
Posts: 7083 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
An opposite cline of ancestry appears to originate in the Near East [i.e. Qatari Arabs] and decreases into Egypt and westward across North Africa [k = 6, 8].
Near Easterners are mainly associated with lineages HV, R0, J, N2, M, and N1. Finally, the centered position of North Africans is explained by higher frequencies of West Eurasian lineages with respect to the African haplogroups, by the small frequencies of East Eurasian and M1 lineages, and by the presence of U6 haplogroup.
Haplogroup R0a, a sister clade of HV, oc- curs in populations from the Near East, the Caucasus, and Mediterranean Europe. It was found in two Berbers from Asni and two Siwi. J and T sister clades might have originated in the Near East ∼50,000 years ago, but they could have been re- cently introduced into Europe during the Neolithic ∼10,000 years ago (Finnila et al. 2001; Palanichamy et al. 2004; Richards et al. 2000). Haplogroup J is observed in popula- tions from the southern Caucasus, the Near East, and NorthAfrica (Brakez et al. 2001; Maca-Meyer et al. 2001; Plaza et al. 2003; Richards et al. 2000). It is not found in the Asni and Bouhria samples, whereas the Berbers from Figuig harbor five J1c, three J2, and three J2a mtDNAs, and the Berbers from Siwa show four J2 mtDNAs. The most numerous T sequences were observed in Bouhria (six T1a and one T2b) while the Figuig samples exhibited three T2 and the Siwa sample only one T1a mtDNA. Haplogroup T was not detected in Asni. Eurasian U macrohaplogroup is subdivided into U1 to U9 (with the exception of U6 restricted to North Africa) and K lineages. U has an extremely broad geographical distribution and accounts for about 20% of European mtDNA sequences (Herrnstadt et al. 2002). In this study, it is represented by four haplogroups: U2, U3, U4 and U5. U2 can be found at low frequencies in populations of western Asia and the Caucasus. Here, it was observed only in the Berbers from Bouhria, by two subclades, U2b (1 sequence) and U2e (2 sequences). U3 is observed at 1.1% (U3a) and 1.3% (U3) in samples from Figuig and Siwa, respectively. This haplogroup has a frequency peak in the Near East (Achilli et al. 2007).
The genetic proximity observed between the Berbers and southern Europeans reveals that these groups shared a com- mon ancestor. Two hypotheses are discussed: one would date these common origins in the Upper Paleolithic with the ex- pansion of anatomically modern humans, from the Near East to both shores of the Mediterranean Sea; the other supports the Near Eastern origin, but would rather date it from the Neolithic, around 10,000 years ago (Ammerman & Cavalli- Sforza 1973; Barbujani et al. 1994; Myles et al. 2005; Rando et al. 1998)
Near Easterners are mainly associated with lineages HV, R0, J, N2, M, and N1.
It seems like then Siwa should have the highest Near East ancestry if I am understanding correctly. I don't see a strong correlation with this other article:
The Complex and Diversified Mitochondrial Gene Pool of Berber Populations
posted
^ But what Lioness cited was mitochondrial DNA not Y-chromosomal.
Posts: 26285 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol: Haplogroup F is thought to represent a second and later stage of human migration out of Africa 50 thousand years ago (kya)(see Figures 4 and 5).