posted
Running away again? Of course, you'll pop up elsewhere to spout the same crap tomorrow. Do what you will to squirm out of the fact that your fairy tales just got thrashed. The same thrashing will await your fairytales the next time you bring them up and present them as facts that are supported by the literature.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: So what's the crap you said about region-specific?
This is the region-specific "crap" I was talking about:
quote: According to our ADMIXTURE results, two distinct sub-Saharan ancestries are present in Egyptian individuals at k = 6:10; these two ancestry components are highest in the Kenyan Luhya and Maasai populations. However, the “Luhya” ancestry is present at very low proportions, below 10% at k = 6 and below 5% at k = 8 and there is also “Luhya” ancestry detectable in Maasai populations. Thus, we chose the Maasai as the best ancestral sub-Saharan population for extant Egyptians.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Funny how you keep repeating the above libel yet you are NEVER able to prove it!
I don't need to prove it. I just want people to be aware of the issue, and make their own assessment by taking into account your posts and general behavior on this forum.
Of course. The people who frequent this forum have eyes and (unlike you) a sound mind to read all my posts and know that my behavior and overall expressions have been consistent in this forum and not at all reflect your false allegations.
quote:I just want to add it's very lame of you trying to steal African historical heritage like that. I don't see the purpose because at the end scientific evidences wins (like the Ramses III, screaming mummy and 18th Royal dynasty aDNA analysis or the cultural continuity between past African culture and Ancient Egypt). I don't see the purpose in any form of racism. This goes to you and other ID named above.
And again, how exactly am I trying to "steal" African historical heritage??!! Where did I ever deny that the Egyptians were Africans and anything else but Africans?? Exactly what racism have I ever expressed.
As I said, your mind is obviously not at all sound but very disturbed. I suggest you leave this forum to the sane and seek professional help. Posts: 26285 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Where did I say otherwise in your quote, lying piece of sh!t?
I'm telling you. Ahmanuttheultimate seems to be suffering from some kind of paranoid delusion. He is "reading" things that aren't really there. LOLPosts: 26285 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^I already answered Swenet about that, but of course like a headless chicken you (and Sweety) run around in all directions and trying to change the subject because I nailed you on that one and the other stupid racist Swenet too:
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Where did I say otherwise in your quote, lying piece of sh!t?
So what's the crap you said about region-specific?
DNA Tribes says African Great Lakes, Southern and West Africans then Horn of Africa in that order and you try to spin it to mean Horn Africans first for some reason.
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: DNA Tribes says African Great Lakes, Southern and West Africans then Horn of Africa in that order
What the lying troll "forgets" to point out is that the Horn of Africa, North Africa and the Levant region (which includes modern day Egypt) are expected to have lower MLI scores due to their foreign components. These foreign components are made up of foreign STR alleles that caused the native, region-specific STR profiles of these respective regions to drop in frequency:
Amun Ra the ultimate liar likes to present skewed analyses and present them as fact, to advance his lying ass fairytales. Of course DNA Tribes didn't intentionally skew these analyses; they were working with the scraps they were given. However, Amun Ra has been told this before, yet he keeps on promoting his fairytales. But what else can one expect of a lying ass Afroloon troll?
Since MLI scores are ratios (the likelihood of finding the STR profile in the studied region as opposed to the world) they logically don't have an upper boundary nor sense of definiteness to them and will fluctuate depending on 1) how frequent an STR profile is elsewhere in the world and 2) whether the original populations are still around. In other words, there is nothing in this analysis that rules out that ancient Nubians and proto-Berber speakers would have had MLI scores that would dwarf the MLI scores of the regions in DNA Tribes anslysis.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: DNA Tribes says African Great Lakes, Southern and West Africans then Horn of Africa in that order
What the lying troll "forgets" to point out is that the Horn of Africa, North Africa and the Levant region (which includes modern day Egypt) are expected to have lower MLI scores due to their foreign components. These foreign components are made up of foreign STR alleles that caused the native, region-specific STR profiles of these respective regions to drop in frequency:
This I agree of course (I already said so on this forum in previous threads). It's like the whole basis of any analysis about Ancient Egypt ethnic affiliations.
The BASIS: Basically, modern population living in modern Egypt in particular. Are not the same as the Ancient ones which were mostly Africans like Sub-Saharan Africans (Somali, Yoruba, Wolof, Bantu, Dinka, etc). ( if AEians were Eurasians, the aDNA of Ancient Egyptians mummies would match Eurasians populations not sub-Saharan Africans like Great Lakes, Southern, and West Africans ).
Basically, when we want to study the ethnic affiliation of Ancient Egypt, we want to know whether they were more like modern Africans (aka sub-saharan/black Africans), modern European or modern West Asian. Genetically, of course, as well as historically, culturally, etc.
Modern Egyptians don't match the aDNA of the ancient Egyptians mummies because they are the products of foreign migrants (foreign components) for the most part post-dating the Ancient Egyptian empire. That is after the end of the AE empire many foreign migrants from Europe and West Asia conquered it, including Assyrians, Greeks, Romans, Arabs/Muslims. Which changed the genetic profiles of modern Egyptians and make them NOT representative of the Ancient Egyptian populations.
So when we want to know the basic question to which modern population Ancient Egyptians were the closest it's definitely not Europeans or West Asians, or population mostly composed of migrants from those regions like in modern Egypt but Africans (aka black/Sub-Saharan Africans aka Africans from the Great Lakes, Southern and West Africa).
As a side note, we can notice all those African populations cited above (Great Lakes Africans, etc) are also "recent" migrants to their respective regions and were ultimately previously in ancient times inhabiting North Africa in the Sahara. Both Ancient Egyptians and Sub-Saharan Africans are descendant of the people inhabiting the Sahara. Who themselves (the inhabitants of the Sahara/future Sub-Saharan Africans) used to inhabit East Africa in very ancient times (based on genetics (E-P2 origin, etc) and linguistic origin of their language families). It was in ancient times but it was still well after the OOA migrations of non-Africans.
So the DNA Tribes results, as well as Ramses III being E1b1a EXCLUDE Europeans, West Asians or modern population made from migrants from those regions like modern Egypt to be the closest modern representatives of Ancient Egyptians.
Of course nothing justify the racist Swenet and Djehuti who goes our of their way to try to reverse the order of matching modern populations.
DNA Tribes says Great Lakes, Southern and West Africans then Horn of Africa in that order and Swenet and Djehuti try to spin it to mean Horn Africans first for some racist reason. We know the reasons, it's because those populations are mixed with Eurasians migrants after Ancient Egyptian times (the foreign component Swenet was talking about) and were considered wrongly by past racists historians as part of the hamitic race.
Too bad for racists like Swenet and Djehuti, Ancient Egyptians match modern population in the Great Lakes, Southern and West African first and then Horn Africans due to their high level of foreign admixtures with Eurasians.
Archaeologically, we also know Ancient Egyptians were not foreign European or West Asian migrants but indigenous Africans the products of the Green Saharan, Tasian, Badarian and Naqada African archaeological cultures. See here and herePosts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: DNA Tribes says Great Lakes, Southern and West Africans then Horn of Africa in that order
Sure, it's in that order, but what your lying ass has a hard time coming to grips with is that it's not in that order because that order dictates the order of affinity to the royal remains in question. You admit that you agree with this, but you still maintain that your literal interpretation of MLI scores is nevertheless correct.
You know what it's called, right, when someone is fully aware that their premise--which in this case is your assumption that MLI score peaks necessarily depict the closest genetic affinity-- is false, but deliberately omits this because it interferes with their favoured interpretation? It's called fraud. You're a fraud, plain and simple.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Crybaby complaints aside, Ramses III's STR profile is more likely to occur inside the Horn region than the STR profiles of 93% of the individuals in the Horn region--a placement far higher than the ranking of Ramses III's STR profile within DNA Tribes' non-East African regions. MLI scores have no bearing on these TribeScores, which, as DNA Tribes says, put MLI scores into their proper context--not the other way around.
Ramses III-----------------------------------Pentawer Horn of Africa (0.93)--------------------------Horn of Africa (0.86) African Great Lakes (0.84)--------------------African Great Lakes (0.71) Tropical West Africa, Levant (0.76)------------Southern African (0.66) North Africa (0.75)----------------------------North African (0.62) Southern Africa (0.74)------------------------Tropical West African (0.54) ------------------------------------------------Levant (0.5)
posted
DNA Tribes: Specifically, both of these ancient individuals inherited the alleles D21S11=35 and CSFIPO=7, which are found throughout Sub-Saharan Africa but are comparatively rare or absent in other regions of the world . These African related alleles are different from the African related alleles identified for the previously studied Amarna period mummies (D18S51=19 and D21S11=34).11 This provides independent evidence for African autosomal ancestry in two different pharaonic families of New Kingdom Egypt.
posted
Just give it up fraud, you don't even remotely have a case. You're already pre-defeated by the vast literature on anthropological classifications of AEs. You're a fringe nutcase, just like the flat earth conspiracy theorists.
--The AE language does NOT support an ordering of affinity of Great Lakes > Southern African > Tropical West African > Horn of Africa
--Y chromosome analyses of the African component in Egyptians do NOT support an ordering of affinity of Great Lakes > Southern African > Tropical West African > Horn of Africa
--mtDNA analyses of the African component in Egyptians do NOT support an ordering of affinity of Great Lakes > Southern African > Tropical West African > Horn of Africa
--Autosomal analyses of the African component in Egyptians do NOT support an ordering of affinity of Great Lakes > Southern African > Tropical West African > Horn of Africa
--Metric cranio-facial analyses of AE skeletal remains do NOT support an ordering of Great Lakes > Southern African > Tropical West African > Horn of Africa
--Non-metric cranio-facial analyses of AE skeletal remains do NOT support an ordering of Great Lakes > Southern African > Tropical West African > Horn of Africa
--predynastic culture does NOT support an ordering of affinity of Great Lakes > Southern African > Tropical West African > Horn of Africa
--NO respected authority on AE biology support an ordering of affinity of Great Lakes > Southern African > Tropical West African > Horn of Africa
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
You're reduced to posting the same graph over and over, without even being able to explain it. Your literal interpretation of pharaonic MLI scores as representing proportional measures of affinity to the various African regions delineated by DNA Tribes has never been reproduced by the existing literature. NEVER.
posted
Autosomal DNA analysis and of actual Ancient Egyptian mummies support an ordering of affinity of Great Lakes > Southern African > Tropical West African > Horn of Africa
posted
^Circular reasoning. Your low IQ is preventing you from recognizing your own fallacies. It doesn't bespeak of beyond 2nd grade intelligence to use your own interpretation of DNA Tribes' MLI scores to independently confirm that your own interpretation of DNA Tribes' results is sound or supported by the literature or anything else for that matter.
Again: Your literal interpretation of pharaonic MLI scores as representing proportional measures of affinity to the various African regions delineated by DNA Tribes has never been reproduced by the existing literature. NEVER.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's a bit ridiculous even for a stupid racist like you to say the MLI scores haven't been reproduced in literature since this thread is about Ramses III (and the screaming mummy) being determined to be E1b1a, the most common haplogroup among Great Lakes, Southern and West Africans (including African-Americans).
quote:"Genetic kinship analyses revealed identical haplotypes in both mummies (table 1⇓); using the Whit Athey’s haplogroup predictor, we determined the Y chromosomal haplogroup E1b1a . The testing of polymorphic autosomal microsatellite loci provided similar results in at least one allele of each marker (table 2⇓)."
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: It's a bit ridiculous even for a stupid racist like you to say the MLI scores haven't been reproduced
Correction: YOUR INTERPRETATION of the MLI scores has NEVER been reproduced. That's right. Not even once. On the other hand, you'll be hard pressed to find analyses which do not independently comfirm my interpretation of both the MLI scores and the TribeScores.
Anyone familiar with crackpot theories will immediately classify your fairytales as such and recognize that you're full of sh!t:
quote: How to Spot Pseudoscience Very few claims that aren't true actually qualify as theories. Let's review the four main requirements that a theory must fulfill. 1) A theory must originate from, and be well supported by, experimental evidence. Anecdotal or unsubstantiated reports don't qualify. It must be supported by many strands of evidence, and not just a single foundation. You'll find that most pseudoscience is supported by only a single foundation. 2) A theory must be specific enough to be falsifiable by testing. If it cannot be tested or refuted, it can't qualify as a theory. And if something is truly testable, others must be able to repeat the tests and get the same results. You'll find that this feature is truly rare among pseudosciences; they'll generally claim some excuse or make up a reason why it can't be tested or repeated by others. 3) A theory must make specific, testable predictions about things not yet observed. 4) A theory must allow for changes based on the discovery of new evidence. It must be dynamic, tentative, and correctable. You'll find that most pseudoscience does not allow for changes based on new discoveries.
Re: And if something is truly testable, others must be able to repeat the tests and get the same results.
and:
they'll generally claim some excuse or make up a reason why it can't be tested or repeated by others.
^Describes your fairytales perfectly since all of your claims (especially your idea of a literal interpretation of MLI scores) and testable predictions thereof have already been falsified by the literature on numerous occasions and when I challenge you to produce results that independently confirm your fairy tales you use your own interpretation to confirm the validity of your own interpretation, like a low IQ crackhead or you'll make excuses like a little evasive b!tch:
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: It's a bit ridiculous even for a stupid racist like you to say the MLI scores haven't been reproduced in literature
Just curious, DNATribes hasn't provided any break down of their so called Ehtiopians. Anyone has info on the ethnics groups within Ethiopia DNATribes tested?
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Early 2013 they integrated the Omotic samples from Pagani into their database but as far as I know those were only included in their SNP analyses. Not sure how they would convert such genome-wide data into STR samples. So I'm guessing their STR Horn region hasn't changed much from the Sudan/Ethiopian area it encompassed back when the first Amarna results came out in early 2012, while their SNP Horn region is presumably more comprehensive due to the inclusion of the aforementioned samples from Pagani.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Swenet, I don't see any point in arguing with a lunatic. The nut accuses us of trying to match ancient Egyptian genotypes to modern "Eurasians" when we never said such absurd notions. Meanwhile the only one trying to match ancient Egyptian genotypes to modern populations is HIM!
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Since MLI scores are ratios (the likelihood of finding the STR profile in the studied region as opposed to the world) they logically don't have an upper boundary nor sense of definiteness to them and will fluctuate depending on 1) how frequent an STR profile is elsewhere in the world and 2) whether the original populations are still around. In other words, there is nothing in this analysis that rules out that ancient Nubians and proto-Berber speakers would have had MLI scores that would dwarf the MLI scores of the regions in DNA Tribes anslysis.
Of course. One significant factor DNA Tribes and these other studies don't take into account is the major population shifts that have happened in history. For example, during pharaonic times up until late period of foreign rule most of the Egyptian populace lived in the Nile Valley and NOT in the Delta. Yet today the demographic situation is the opposite and has been the case since the Greco-Roman period. With such a shift of population focus and thus representation from the indigenous Nile Valley to the more foreign dominated Delta it is no surprise that there are going to be stark differences in STR profiles between the ancient mummies (many of whom came from the south) and the modern Egyptian populaces (many of whom reside in the north) due to such skewed demographics.
reconstruction of Egyptian priest Nesperennub
modern Aswani Egyptian Posts: 26285 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^The most embarrassing thing is that almost everything Amun Ra the retard ascribes to DNA Tribes is denounced by them in the two articles. The authors consistently emphasize that the MLI scores are what they are TODAY. This is consistent with how I see the results (i.e. the results lean towards inner Africa because the AE and related populations aren't around any more in pristine form) and contrary to how he interprets the results (i.e. as immutable and absolute attestations of an ancestor/descendant relationship between the royal mummies and the populations with the highest MLI scores). DNA Tribes never makes such claims:
quote:Average MLI scores in Table 1 indicate the STR profiles of the Amarna mummies would be most frequent in present day populations of several African regions: including the Southern African (average MLI 326.94), African Great Lakes (average MLI 323.76), and Tropical West African (average MLI 83.74) regions. These regional matches do not necessarily indicate an exclusively African ancestry for the Amarna pharaonic family.
quote:Discussion: Results in Table 1 indicate that the autosomal STR profiles for both Ramesses and Unknown Man E are most frequent in present day regions of Sub-Saharan Africa and also found in Near Eastern regions at lower frequencies
posted
Still trying to get my hands around. Their Ethiopian profile.
===
Q: How does DNA Tribes STR testing compare to autosomal tests that use hundreds of thousands of SNP markers?
A: The primary benefit of STR rather than SNP testing is the availability of reference data. DNA Tribes tests industry standard autosomal STR systems, which allow the identification of a person's DNA profile not shared with any other person. Because these STRs have been tested for use in court systems around the world, they allow DNA Tribes to perform the most thorough comparison of a person's own DNA profile to over 1,200 ethnic groups around the world. At present, SNP testing does not yet match the geographical detail of DNA Tribes autosomal STR analysis.
===
I am trying to get a list of Ethiopians "tribes". None is listed on their website. I am seeing all "tribes' through out Africa as their sample but none from Ethiopia. Anyone?
Pagani...Source?
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't want to be splitting hairs but...They have two dots on Somalia. But no indication of who or what is their Ethiopian samples.
All Africans groups are listed ...but Ethiopians
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
I just want to warn people reading this forum about: Swenet Beyoku Trollkillah # Ish Gebor (aka Troll Patrol) Djehuti Tukuler (aka alTakruri) xyyman A few others.
Those people are undercover racists clowns trying to promote the hamitic race myth. What great Africans like Diop, Obenga fought against since the 50s and rejected as pseudo scientific racism by every quarters. Trying to say Ancient Egyptians were closer to Eurasians than most Sub-Saharan Africans (Yoruba, Somali, Wolof, Kongo, Zulu, Ganda, Dinka, etc) despite the genetic and archaeological results exposed in this thread and on this forum showing us the contrary. Notice how they squirm at the mention of haplogroup E-P2 obliterating their stupid racist theory!! The common paternal haplogroup among East, West and most African people alongside haplogroup A and B.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^A bit of a stretch.. Djehuti, Patrol Tukler et al are not shopping any Hamitic Race myth. These guys been on here for years- FIGHTING against such, before I came in 2008, so I know, saw and chipped in for those battles against Evil Euro, Madilda, "Hammer" etc etc. They were at it before- its the exact opposite of what you are saying above. I think you may need to tweak your argument a bit to account for the weaknesses. The indigenous African character of the ancients isn't going anywhere regardless. So nothing will be lost on that score, and the general forum knowledge base will be pushed forward as it has in the past.
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Xyyman. See the delineation of the red Horn region. Like I said, it consists of the wider Sudan/Ethiopia region. Note that this is their STR region, which is different from their SNP region.
STR (Horn region includes the Sudan and Semitic- Cushitic speakers)
Looks like they sampled Somalia/Sudan/Kenya Area(near Great Lakes)...but NOT Ethiopia.
In their list of Tribes in their database, DNATribes does NOT list Ethiopia
Pagani thing..source?
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: DNA Tribes says Great Lakes, Southern and West Africans then Horn of Africa in that order
As the article below says, crackpot theory adherents always make excuses as to why their fairytales aren't supported by the literature. Watch as Amun Ra the ultimate fraud will make excuses and squirm out of posting peer reviewed research which can independently verify the fairytale he tells above.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote: How to Spot Pseudoscience Very few claims that aren't true actually qualify as theories. Let's review the four main requirements that a theory must fulfill. 1) A theory must originate from, and be well supported by, experimental evidence. Anecdotal or unsubstantiated reports don't qualify. It must be supported by many strands of evidence, and not just a single foundation. You'll find that most pseudoscience is supported by only a single foundation. 2) A theory must be specific enough to be falsifiable by testing. If it cannot be tested or refuted, it can't qualify as a theory. And if something is truly testable, others must be able to repeat the tests and get the same results. You'll find that this feature is truly rare among pseudosciences; they'll generally claim some excuse or make up a reason why it can't be tested or repeated by others. 3) A theory must make specific, testable predictions about things not yet observed. 4) A theory must allow for changes based on the discovery of new evidence. It must be dynamic, tentative, and correctable. You'll find that most pseudoscience does not allow for changes based on new discoveries.
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: ^^A bit of a stretch.. Djehuti, Patrol Tukler et al are not shopping any Hamitic Race myth. These guys been on here for years- FIGHTING against such, before I came in 2008, so I know, saw and chipped in for those battles against Evil Euro, Madilda, "Hammer" etc etc. They were at it before- its the exact opposite of what you are saying above. I think you may need to tweak your argument a bit to account for the weaknesses. The indigenous African character of the ancients isn't going anywhere regardless. So nothing will be lost on that score, and the general forum knowledge base will be pushed forward as it has in the past.
Zaharan I already told you before. I'll be my own judge of character as you can be your own. You thought that beyoku was a biologist while it was very EVIDENT for me that he wasn't. So sorry but I'm not as gullible as you.
I must also have more knowledge than you on genetics because why else you you think beyoku was a biologist? I'm not a biologist either, but I know enough to see when somebody is talking **** with percentile scores for example trying t reverse the other laid down by DNA Tribes and confirmed by the BMJ study (Ramses III=E1b1a).
It's obvious to anybody but you reading this forum that those people are only here to promote the hamitic race myth trying to separate East and West Africans and make Ancient Egyptians closer to Eurasians through their eurasian proxy populations in Africa (modern Berbers, modern North Africans, modern East Africans. All population admixed substantially and recently with Eurasians populations, although East Africans are still mostly black Africans). E-P2 is the common East and West African grandfather well after the OOA migrations of non-Africans.
I wasn't on this forum in 2008, but for me people who were fighting evil euro were not some stupid undercover racists on the internet posing as black Africans while they are NOT but people like Diop, Obenga, Williams. Who, beside Obenga who is still alive, would turn on their grave (or maybe just laugh at their clownish stupidity) reading those stupid racist clowns.
This is unlike Asar Imhotep for example. Who does comparative studies between Kongo and Ancient Egyptian knowledge systems. He doesn't try to separate Kongo people from Ancient Egyptians talking about region-specific aka hamitic specific crap. He was on this forum before any of those undercover racist clowns who only came later posing as black Africans (at the same time there was many racists on this forum. HINT HINT). Of course, the same can be said about numerous African authors like Diop, Obenga, Williams. I must say I also like to study African history, like the Kongo history or West African history on it's own too. When you know the history of many African empires and culture on their own, then you can proceed to do comparative study (including with other world empires and kingdoms or simply between one another). I enjoined anybody reading this forum to go beyond Ancient Egypt history and study the history of various African empires and culture on their own.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
Their geographic map list (dots) has two sample sets from Somalia NOT Ethiopia. Their dateset of population do NOT include Ethiopia but Somalia.
The Somali population seems to be related to or near the Kenya Great Lakes area.
We agreed on the Tribes Score thing. I am digging deeper. Where did you get the Pagani thing from? I am being patient.
Maybe the African bros on here can tell us. What Somali “ethnic” group/Tribes DNATrbies is labeling “Ethipoians”?
It looks like DNATrbies did NOT sample Horners per se.
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Still trying to get my hands around. Their Ethiopian profile.
===
Q: How does DNA Tribes STR testing compare to autosomal tests that use hundreds of thousands of SNP markers?
A: The primary benefit of STR rather than SNP testing is the availability of reference data. DNA Tribes tests industry standard autosomal STR systems, which allow the identification of a person's DNA profile not shared with any other person. Because these STRs have been tested for use in court systems around the world, they allow DNA Tribes to perform the most thorough comparison of a person's own DNA profile to over 1,200 ethnic groups around the world. At present, SNP testing does not yet match the geographical detail of DNA Tribes autosomal STR analysis.
===
I am trying to get a list of Ethiopians "tribes". None is listed on their website. I am seeing all "tribes' through out Africa as their sample but none from Ethiopia. Anyone?
Pagani...Source? [/qb]
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
Sanga (Salo Village, southwestern Central African Republic) (64) Somalia (404) Somalia (96) South Sotho (South Africa) (227)
---
To those who don't get it...DNATribes is essentially saying that they could not have possibly used Pagani's SNP Dataset of Ethiopians.
Do you want to clear-up what you said or meant?
smoke?
Are we back to the Great Lakes?
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Did xyyman catch DNATribes in deception?(talking to my self).
By sampling 2 populations close to the Kenyan/Somali border and then deceptively labeled them “Ethiopians” when they never really sampled Ethiopians.
Now why would they do that? Seems like Rameses III has Tribes Score closest to another population further south in Africa and near the Great Lakes.
Anyone? Am I wrong?
I put the blame on Beyoku. He told DNATribes about the BMJ report and forced them to respond.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Q: How does DNA Tribes STR testing compare to autosomal tests that use hundreds of thousands of SNP markers?
A: ….. At present, SNP testing does not yet match the geographical detail of DNA Tribes autosomal STR analysis.
----- Quote : ^Early 2013 they integrated the Omotic samples from Pagani into their database but as far as I know those were only included in their SNP analyses. Not sure how they would convert such genome-wide data into STR samples. …..e due to the inclusion of the aforementioned samples from Pagani.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
Sanga (Salo Village, southwestern Central African Republic) (64) Somalia (404) Somalia (96) South Sotho (South Africa) (227)
You gotta be kidding me. You can't be THAT senile, gramps. You mean to tell me you've already forgotten about all the DNA Tribes reports that were full with Ethiopian and Nilo Saharan samples? C'mon man. You want the TribeScores to be discredited so bad that you're selectively remembering things.
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: To those who don't get it...DNATribes is essentially saying that they could not have possibly used Pagani's SNP Dataset of Ethiopians.
Do you want to clear-up what you said or meant?
To those who don't get it...DNA Tribes is essentially saying that Xyyman is full of sh!t when he claims that the populations from Pagani weren't integrated into the DNA Tribes database.
C'mon man. You've got to be kidding me. Why am I even talking to you? You talk a big game but you clearly haven't done your homework.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: but.. but... they're making me cry
Come on babygirl. Less emotional appeals and venting, more solid evidence that refutes what I'm saying. I'm challenging you openly, babygirl. Where is your counter evidence that Pentawer and Ramses III do not, in fact, rank better in the Horn region than in the South African, Great Lakes and West African regions?
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Ramses III's and Pentawer's STR profile ranking in DNA Tribes' African genetic regions, i.e. their TribeScores.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Ramses III-----------------------------------Pentawer Horn of Africa (0.93)--------------------------Horn of Africa (0.86) African Great Lakes (0.84)--------------------African Great Lakes (0.71) Tropical West Africa, Levant (0.76)------------Southern African (0.66) North Africa (0.75)----------------------------North African (0.62) Southern Africa (0.74)------------------------Tropical West African (0.54) ------------------------------------------------Levant (0.5)
TribeScores are a unique scoring method developed by DNA Tribes that compares a person's match scores for a population to the scores of actual members within that ethnic group or region. [...] TribeScores indicate how high or low your score is in the specific context of each population, providing the necessary point of reference to explain each MLI score.
Also, babygirl, if it's not too much to ask, post one peer reviewed, well received scientific article where your fairytale order of affinity to Ancient Egyptians is Great Lakes > South Africa > Tropical West Africa > Horn of Africa was observed by the authors. I'll be waiting babygirl. Let me know when you're done evading these ass whoopings, when you've grown a pair and when you are ready to prove that your fairytales are more than just pseudo-scientific figments of your imagination.
----------------- Q: How does DNA Tribes STR testing compare to autosomal tests that use hundreds of thousands of SNP markers?
A: ….. At present, SNP testing does not yet match the geographical detail of DNA Tribes autosomal STR analysis.
----- Quote : ^Early 2013 they integrated the Omotic samples from Pagani into their database but as far as I know those were only included in their SNP analyses. Not sure how they would convert such genome-wide data into STR samples. …..e due to the inclusion of the aforementioned samples from Pagani.
----------------
Where is the data or link that Rameses III STR profile matches Ethiopians. Theire STR database does NOT included Ethiopians but two peoples from the Kenyan/Somali border area close to the Great Lakes.
Are you blowing smoke….again?
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Where is the data or link that Rameses III STR profile matches Ethiopians. Theire STR database does NOT included Ethiopians
What are you talking about man. The only one who keeps on talking about Ethiopians here is you. Not that I'm denying that they're in the Horn region, but why do you even bring them up. You must have mentioned them more than 10 times by now. Before you budged in with your nonsense no one even mentioned them specifically in relation to Ramses III. WTF are you talking about? Please enlighten me because from here it sounds like you're seeing things.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
You are not talking to me…you have an audience…you are on the floor. Where is the data that Ethiopians STR profile is closest match to Rameses III?
Ethiopians STR is NOT included in the disclosed populations by DNATrbies. Yes, they, DNATribes have updated their SNP database. The SNP(genome wide/AIM) of Rameses III was NEVER published?
More lies and smoke screen…fron you and DNATribes? Am I wrong?
Q: How does DNA Tribes STR testing compare to autosomal tests that use hundreds of thousands of SNP markers?
A: ….. At present, SNP testing does not yet match the geographical detail of DNA Tribes autosomal STR analysis.Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Again you keep talking about Ethiopians specifically why are you singling them out? Were you bullied by an Ethiopian in your younger days or something? What do you have against these people? No one was even talking specifically about them. Take your pills man, gramps.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
My bad…Rameses III STR Tribes Score is closest to two Sub-Saharan Somali populations close to the Kenyan/Somali border.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Where is the data or link that Rameses III STR profile matches Ethiopians. Theire STR database does NOT included Ethiopians
. Before you budged in …..
WTF are you talking about?
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
----------------- Q: How does DNA Tribes STR testing compare to autosomal tests that use hundreds of thousands of SNP markers?
A: ….. At present, SNP testing does not yet match the geographical detail of DNA Tribes autosomal STR analysis.
----- Quote by Swenet: ^Early 2013 they integrated the Omotic samples from Pagani into their database but as far as I know those were only included in their SNP analyses. Not sure how they would convert such genome-wide data into STR samples. …..e due to the inclusion of the aforementioned samples from Pagani.
----------------
Where is the data or link that Rameses III STR profile matches Ethiopians. Theire STR database does NOT included Ethiopians but two peoples from the Kenyan/Somali border area close to the Great Lakes.
Are you blowing smoke….again? [/QB]
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Rameses III STR Tribes Score is closest to two Sub-Saharan Somali populations close to the Kenyan/Somali border.
Why do you perpetuate this crap knowing you won't be able to stand behind it the moment I ask you to back this up? And what the hell is "a Sub-Saharan Somali"? Is there such a thing as a Somali who is not Sub Saharan?
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Junior sorry I budged in and caught you in a lie.
Which would be? C'mon gramps. You're reaching.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Can someone post a pic of these two Sub-Saharan Somali population near the Great Lakes?
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I said many times before. “the devil is in the details”. Eg Near East/Middle East = Bedoiuns.
Somali bordermen near the Great Lakes=Horners. Perception, perception, perception.
You are on your own. I threw you a lifeline.
I am out ……..for now.
---
To those who don’t get it….The DNATribes data shows Ethiopians had absolutely no connection per se with AE..IRREGARDLESS of the perception. Sudan, Kenya, some Somal populations..and of course Great Lakes Africans are the closest within the region to AE.. Pagani dataset does NOT corrabrates DNAtribes data because the dataset is based upon two DIFFERENT genetic material. I rest.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Stop feeding yourself these voluntary lies. The Horn region does not consist of two "Great Lakes Somali" populations, whatever a "Great Lakes Somali" is in your lively imagination. As I said earlier, there are also Sudanese in DNA Tribes' Horn region. The DNA Tribes' Great Lakes region construct is mostly made up of Sudanese and Cushitic-like ancestry anyway. Sorry to crush your bubble but Great Lakes in DNA Tribes does not equal the Luhya ancestry you so desperately want it to be.
He said "Great Lakes Somali". That has to be the best coping strategy I've seen in a long time. Anything to keep your Luhya=Ancient Egypt wet dream intact, huh?
posted
Sudanese ....yeah that makes more geographic sense! Ethiopians STR profile does NOT march up to Rameses III. Now we are back on the same page.
Luyha are ancestral to Maghrebians and Mosaii are ancestral to AEians. Henn et al, Lazaridis et al. You are right.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Stop feeding yourself these voluntary lies. The Horn region does not consist of two "Great Lakes Somali" populations, whatever a "Great Lakes Somali" is in your lively imagination. As I said earlier, there are also Sudanese in DNA Tribes' Horn region. The DNA Tribes' Great Lakes region construct is mostly made up of Sudanese and Cushitic-like ancestry anyway. Sorry to crush your bubble but Great Lakes in DNA Tribes does not equal the Luhya ancestry you so desperately want it to be.
He said "Great Lakes Somali". That has to be the best coping strategy I've seen in a long time. Everything to keep your Luhya wet dream intact, huh?
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
A Hindu faggot..
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Zaharan I already told you before. I'll be my own judge of character as you can be your own. You thought that beyoku was a biologist while it was very EVIDENT for me that he wasn't. So sorry but I'm not as gullible as you. I must also have more knowledge than you on genetics because why else you you think beyoku was a biologist? I'm not a biologist either, but I know enough to see when somebody is talking **** with percentile scores for example trying t reverse the other laid down by DNA Tribes and confirmed by the BMJ study (Ramses III=E1b1a).
^^His web handle stated biologist, now we know its just a forum label. But regardless, what anyone thinks he is, it is quite frankly irrelevant.
It's obvious to anybody but you reading this forum that those people are only here to promote the hamitic race myth trying to separate East and West Africans and make Ancient Egyptians closer to Eurasians through their eurasian proxy populations in Africa (modern Berbers, modern North Africans, modern East Africans. All population admixed substantially and recently with Eurasians populations, although East Africans are still mostly black Africans). E-P2 is the common East and West African grandfather well after the OOA migrations of non-Africans.
Laughable nonsense. I have been on here for 6 years and saw and participated in some battles AGAINST the Hamitic myth. These guys were here years before that as old ES archives going back to 2005 show. And they were on the old NileValley forum. Your accusation against these veterans is not only nonsensical, but smacks of diversionary tactics. You haven't been on the front lines for years against the racist dogs. You are a Johnny-come-lately reposting what has already been compiled over the years. Recaps have a legit place for knowledge and battle, and keeping info fresh in Google, but you have this habit of declaring things as if they were oracles from heaven. Hell, E-P2 is old news around here. You declare it like its a major motion picture production.
I wasn't on this forum in 2008, but for me people who were fighting evil euro were not some stupid undercover racists on the internet posing as black Africans while they are NOT but people like Diop, Obenga, Williams. Who, beside Obenga who is still alive, would turn on their grave (or maybe just laugh at their clownish stupidity) reading those stupid racist clowns.
Well that's the thing. You were not back here in 2008, so you have no clue. It is obvious that you do not know what you are talking about.
This is unlike Asar Imhotep for example. Who does comparative studies between Kongo and Ancient Egyptian knowledge systems. He doesn't try to separate Kongo people from Ancient Egyptians talking about region-specific aka hamitic specific crap. He was on this forum before any of those undercover racist clowns who only came later posing as black Africans (at the same time there was many racists on this forum. HINT HINT).
Asar is a solid guy who has made many great contributions over the years. The old archives show him joining with the veteran "racists" you allege above to DEBUNK any Hamitic nonsense. Again, your keep posturing around here like you are such an expert but you haven't a clue.
Of course, the same can be said about numerous African authors like Diop, Obenga, Williams. I must say I also like to study African history, like the Kongo history or West African history on it's own too. When you know the history of many African empires and culture on their own, then you can proceed to do comparative study (including with other world empires and kingdoms or simply between one another). I enjoined anybody reading this forum to go beyond Ancient Egypt history and study the history of various African empires and culture on their own.
Again, comparative study is old news around here- you act like you just "discovered" its importance. Where do you think the hundreds of pages on non-Egyptian Africa on this forum comes from? Have you seen Tukler's work over the years on exactly that? Or Djehuti's numerous postings on African empires? Or even the detailed references Clyde sometimes brings to the table? ES is no amen corner- there is plenty of disagreement- but the forum is still valuable and your wild charges are way out of line. You "enjoin" people on this forum to go beyond ancient Egypt? Really now? Where did you get this blinding insight?
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic