quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Nice find TP. I always contend that the tropical belt of Africa was NOT the orginal source. It was either Sahara or Further south in Southern Africa. Not the Ethiopian region per Leakey.
Tishkoff suggested origin in Southern Africa. Norton suggest origin in more Northern Africa.
I beleive it was more Northern Africa.
The Sahara was not always as dry as it is today. There was a green period with plenty of vegetation and was much more habitable for humans. One of the populations living at that time were the Capsians in the Tunisan region 10,000 to 6,000 BCE. After that the Sahara was getting drier and drier.
After the drying of the Sahara there is no evidence of human settlemjent in the Maghreb until around 800 BC until Phoenician and Greek settlements.
So there is little evidence that the current population is derived from those earlier populations. There is gap there of nothing happeng for a few thousand years
Show the fossil records of cold adapted Eurasians, in the "Now Sahara" or just shut the F-ck up, with your hypothetical B.S.
All that flows from those crocked fingers is rubbish. Nothing based on facts! The Caspians are known to cluster with African populations from the South. Unless you now try to claim that the Saami were at the foundation of the Caspians. They in particular are from a extremely cold place, even to this day it gets extremely cold. lol
Again, for this senile euronut.
WHAT BONES CAN TELL: BIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES ON THE HUNTER-GATHERERS OF THE MAGHREB:[/qb]
quote: The extremely large skeletal samples that come from sites such as Taforalt (Fig. 8.13) and Afalou constitute an invaluable resource for understanding the makers of Iberomaurusian artifacts, and their number is unparalleled elsewhere in Africa for the early Holocene. Frequently termed Mechta-Afalou or Mechtoid, these were a skeletally robust people and definitely African in origin, though attempts, such as those of Ferembach (1985), to establish similarities with much older and rarer Aterian skeletal remains are tenuous given the immense temporal separation between the two (Close and Wendorf 1990). At the opposite end of the chronological spectrum, dental morphology does suggest connections with later Africans, including those responsible for the Capsian Industry (Irish 2000) and early mid-Holocene human remains from the western half of the Sahara (Dutour 1989), something that points to the Maghreb as one of the regions from which people recolonised the desert (MacDonald 1998).
Turning to what can be learned about cultural practices and disease, the individuals from Taforalt, the largest sample by far, display little evidence of trauma, though they do suggest a high incidence of infant mortality, with evidence for dental caries, arthritis, and rheumatism among other degenerative conditions. Interestingly, Taforalt also provides one of the oldest known instances of the practice of trepanation, the surgical removal of a portion of the cranium; the patient evidently survived for some time, as there are signs of bone regrowth in the affected area. Another form of body modification was much more widespread and, indeed, a distinctive feature of the Iberomaurusian skeletal sample as a whole. This was the practice of removing two or more of the upper incisors, usually around puberty and from both males and females, something that probably served as both a rite of passage and an ethnic marker (Close and Wendorf 1990), just as it does in parts of sub-Saharan Africa today (e.g., van Reenen 1987). Cranial and postcranial malformations are also apparent and may indicate pronounced endogamy at a much more localised level (Hadjouis 2002), perhaps supported by the degree of variability between different site samples noted by Irish (2000).
--Lawrence Barham The First Africans: African Archaeology from the Earliest Toolmakers to Most Recent Foragers (Cambridge World Archaeology)
quote:
Craniometric data from seven human groups (Tables 3, 4) were subjected to principal components analysis, which allies the early Holocene population at Gobero (Gob-e) with mid-Holocene “Mechtoids” from Mali and Mauritania [18], [26], [27] and with Late Pleistocene Iberomaurusians and early Holocene Capsians from across the Maghreb (see cluster in Figure 6). The striking similarity between these seven human populations confirms previous suggestions regarding their affinity [18] and is particularly significant given their temporal range (Late Pleistocene to mid-Holocene) and trans-Saharan geographic distribution (across the Maghreb to the southern Sahara).
[...]
Trans-Saharan craniometry. Principal components analysis of craniometric variables closely allies the early Holocene occupants at Gobero, who were buried with Kiffian material culture, with Late Pleistocene to mid-Holocene humans from the Maghreb and southern Sahara referred to as Iberomaurusians, Capsians and “Mechtoids.” Outliers to this cluster of populations include an older Aterian sample and the mid-Holocene occupants at Gobero associated with Tenerean material culture.
Craniometric data from seven human groups (Tables 3, 4) were subjected to principal components analysis, which allies the early Holocene population at Gobero (Gob-e) with mid-Holocene “Mechtoids” from Mali and Mauritania [18], [26], [27] and with Late Pleistocene Iberomaurusians and early Holocene Capsians from across the Maghreb
Figure 6. Principal components analysis of craniofacial dimensions among Late Pleistocene to mid-Holocene populations from the Maghreb and southern Sahara.
Table 3. Nine human populations sampled for craniometric analysis ranging in age from the Late Pleistocene (ca. 80,000 BP, Aterian) to the mid-Holocene (ca. 4000 BP) and in geographic distribution across the Maghreb to the southern Sahara [18], [19], [26], [27], [54]. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0002995.t003
Posts: 22245 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
In summary, although paleoanthropological evidence has established the ancient presence of anatomically modern humans in northern Africa prior to 60,000 ya [35], the simplest interpretation of our results is that the majority of ancestry in modern North Africans derives from populations outside of Africa, through at least two episodes of increased gene flow during the past 40,000 years....
We identify a gradient of likely autochthonous Maghrebi ancestry that increases from east to west across northern Africa; this ancestry is likely derived from “back-to-Africa” gene flow more than 12,000 years ago [ya], prior to the Holocene
Really, so where is "your evidence" for this? LOL
They all magically navigated "back-to-Africa" without any explanation given.
Ironically all this recent intrusions follows the same gene flow and pooling as what you've summed up! Irony is too that all those populations are cold adapted. When remains in Africa have been found Tropical Adapted.
quote: The makers of these assemblages can therefore be seen as (1) a group of Homo sapiens predating and/or contemporary to the out-of-Africa exodus of the species, and (2) geographically one of the (if not the) closest from the main gate to Eurasia at the northeastern corner of the African continent.
Although Moroccan specimens have been discovered far away from this area, they may provide us with one of the best proxies of the African groups that expanded into Eurasia[...]
quote: The area differs from other sties areas such as the Nile Valley or the Near East because the Middle/Late Paleolithic transition in the Sahara is not marked by changes in core technology. The overall dates for the Libya sites containing the Aterian tool technique range from 47,000- 24,500 BP. Some of the dating techniques were Thermoluminescence (TL) which proved successful in dating several types of sediments including "desert loss" sand dunes.
quote: This paper critically reviews the meaning and history of research of the Aterian. This highlights a number of serious issues with definitions and interpretations of this technocomplex, ranging from a lack of definitional consensus to problems with the common view of the Aterian as a ‘desert adaptation’. Following this review, the paper presents the results of a quantitative study of six North African MSA assemblages (Aterian, Nubian Complex and ‘MSA’).
quote: Regular Middle Paleolithic inventories as well as Middle Paleolithic inventories of Aterian type have a long chronology in Morocco going back to MIS 6 and are interstratified in some sites. Their potential for detecting chrono-cultural patterns is low. The transition from the Middle to Upper Paleolithic, here termed Early Upper Paleolithic—at between 30 to 20 ka—remains a most enigmatic era. Scarce data from this period requires careful and fundamental reconsidering of human presence. By integrating environmental data in the reconstruction of population dynamics, clear correlations become obvious. High resolution data are lacking before 20 ka, and at some sites this period is characterized by the occurrence of sterile layers between Middle Paleolithic deposits, possibly indicative of a very low presence of humans in Morocco. After Heinrich Event 1, there is an enormous increase of data due to the prominent Late Iberomaurusian deposits that contrast strongly with the foregoing accumulations in terms of sedimentological features, fauna, and artifact composition. The Younger Dryas again shows a remarkable decline of data marking the end of the Paleolithic. Environmental improvements in the Holocene are associated with an extensive Epipaleolithic occupation. Therefore, the late glacial cultural sequence of Morocco is a good test case for analyzing the interrelationship of culture and climate change.
--Late Pleistocene Human Occupation of Northwest Africa: A Crosscheck of Chronology and Climate Change in Morocco Jörg Linstädter, Prehistoric Archaeology, Cologne University, GERMANY Josef Eiwanger, KAAK, German Archaeological Institute, GERMANY Abdessalam Mikdad, INSAP, MOROCCO Gerd-Christian Weniger, Neanderthal Museum,
Posts: 22245 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: The following is Troll Patrols explanation for possible U5 in in North Africa:
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol I read somewhere in a source once, that Vikings took slaves to Northwest Africa as well. Guess who those were? Saami. Yes, Saami
Benna Henn et al are wrong.
There was no gene flow from outside of Africa into North Africa prior to the Holocene.
Outside of Africa gene flow into North Africa is due to more recent events including Phoenician settlement, Romans,Vandals Arabs, Expulsion of Moriscos, Ottoamns and European slaves of the Barbary. nothing prior to the holocene
If that is true then some hpalogroups found in North Africas were not present in Africa prior to the holocene.
Some of the haplogoups in North Africa both indigenous and not indigenous are:
HV0 HV R0 J T U5 U6 K N1 N2 X M M1 L0 L1 L2 L3 L4 L5
^^^^ xyyman I know you believe there has never been much gene flow from outside Africa into the Maghreb but not all of these haplogoups can be of African origin. Are there any here you think are not African?
Did a back migration prior to the holocene occur? I'm not sure about it. I would say it's possible
Ironically all this recent intrusions follows the same gene flow and genetic pooling as what you've summed up! Irony is too that all those populations are cold adapted. When remains in Africa have been found Tropical Adapted. Shall we review them one at a time?
I assume what you've cited is from the paper by C. Coudray et al.
"The Complex and Diversified Mitochondrial Gene Pool of Berber Populations"
quote:Nevertheless, it was only during the Neolithic transition (around 6000 years ago in the Saharan areas and 5000 years ago in the Maghreb) that North Africa was incontestably marked by various cultural events.
Then, Berbers experienced a long and complicated history with many invasions, conquests and migrations by Phoenicians, Romans, Vandals and Byzantines (Brett & Fentress 1996).
The most significant event was the Arab conquest, begun during the 7th century, when North Africans were converted to Islam, and Arabic became the official unique language employed. In spite of strong resistance, Berbers acquiesced to Arab authority.
Refractory groups were driven out and constrained to more isolated areas.
This troubled past directly influenced the geographical distribution of Berber communities which are nowadays scattered in a vast region extending from Mauritania to Egypt (Siwa oasis) and from the Sahara desert to the Moroccan Atlas mountainous areas.
Over the course of time, the various populations that migrated to North Africa have probably left a footprint in the gene pool of modern Berbers.
In the same way I'm going to dare you to explain why the male-inherited gene pool of the coastal Magrheb populations is overwhelmingly African?
And why the language phylum of Tamazight is an entirely African development.
Let's see if you dare to answer these without coming across as stupid.
quote: North Africans are genetically primarily African. In fact, they're so African that they cluster with Arabs (which, of course, has absolutely NOTHING to do with the notion that U6 and M1 originate in the Near East)!
You can roll your eyes until they touch the back of your head. And yes, these would be the same "north Africans" who are supposedly more genetically close to Europeans than other Africans.
It's quite natural of you to miss the fact that the "north Africans" position in between various African samples and Arabian. Both them and the Horn of Africa group assume such positions [wonder how the "south Arabian" genesis of Ethiopians fall into this].
Given the finding of Arabian ancestry in coastal north Africa, and the same of coastal north Africa in Arabia, it is natural that some overlapping will take place. Yet if one went by your north Africans are Europeans transplanted in Africa, supposedly based on mtDNA that you treat as "European", it is interesting that they appear to position closer to the Arab samples before they do the Europeans.
Not to leave out...my guess is that what constitutes "north Africa" here does not resemble anything as either a comprehensive region-wide sample, or geographical assignment that is not afflicted by politically-charged motives....
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
As xyyman has pointed out they have Ottoman Turkish elements. And they have more Arabian and Euroepan ancestry than other Africans. So much so that even though primarily African biologically they are more similar to Eurasians than other Africans.
This is subjective for a number of reasons:
You are basing it on uniparental markers that you claim are more frequent outside of Africa, while ignoring the uniparental markers that suggest the opposite.
You have not definitively established which elements of the ancestry that the "North Africans" appear to share with ancestry outside is African or non-African in origin.
Non-Africans are expected to show closer similarities with some African groups than they do others, well because, they emerged from only a subset of Africans.
quote: While Maghrebians who speak Arabic have more berber ancestry than the language they speak I don't think it is proper to use the term Tamazight as being synonymous with Maghrebians.
Tamazight ought to be synonymous with Maghrebi groups, as it is the autochthonous language of the area. Arabic came later.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
Not to leave out...my guess is that what constitutes "north Africa" here does not resemble anything as either a comprehensive region-wide sample, or geographical assignment that is not afflicted by politically-charged motives....
[/QB]
Looking at this chart one could say North Africans largely overlap Arabians (yellow and light green dots)
One haplogroup that many Arabians have in high frequecies is J1 North African ancestry in the chart is probably charaterized by highest frequecies in mt E-M81 (E1b1b1b) U6 and M1 Y DNA. These haplogroups are considered to be African.
Regardless North Africans are clustering here closer to West Eurasians than they are to other Africans.
Posts: 43006 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Looking at this chart one could say North Africans largely overlap Arabians although at the top of the chart they are unto themsleves not overlapping or particulary close to anybody.
Which chart are you referencing?
quote: Regardless North Africans are clustering here closer to West Eurasians than they are to other Africans.
Remember this:
Non-Africans are expected to show closer similarities with some African groups than they do others, well because, they emerged from only a subset of Africans.
And this:
You have not definitively established which elements of the ancestry that the "North Africans" appear to share with ancestry outside is African or non-African in origin.
Furthermore, you are treating "west Eurasians" as a bloc, when there is no objective reason to justify it.
Elements of "North Africa" are visibly much closer to "other Africans" before they do elements of your "west Eurasians".
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
Looking at this chart one could say North Africans largely overlap Arabians although at the top of the chart they are unto themsleves not overlapping or particulary close to anybody.
Which chart are you referencing?
you caught an error ther I just changed it. The upper part of the oval is light green Arabian not North African. In the lower portion of the oval is North African in yellow. there they are overlapping Arabian light green.
In the chart they cluster closer to West Eurasians than they do other Africans. You say maybe some of these haplogroups are not West Eurasian maybe they are African.
Here I agree with the traditional afrocentric position. 1) many Maghrebians look look mulatto. 2) There is a history of foreign occupation (and white slavery) 3) There is a 2-4000 year gap of no evidence of human settlement after earlier green period hunter forager populaltions and agrarian popualtions that extend to the present Put these three things together and it weighs toward Eurasian clustering being likely
-and this is before even considering prior to holocene back migration theory Egypt? a different situation being that it is strongly oriented along a river
Posts: 43006 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
In the chart they cluster closer to West Eurasians than they do other Africans.
You said this already, and what did I say about it?
quote: You say maybe some of these haplogroups are not West Eurasian maybe they are African.
I did not specifically say that, but yes, it is a possibility.
Hg R chromosomes are shared between certain "Eurasians" and some "Africans", but not with others. This doesn't necessarily mean that said ancestry cannot be African in origin.
quote:
Here I agree with the traditional afrocentric position. 1) many Maghrebians look look mulatto. 2) There is a history of foreign occupation (and white slavery) 3) There is a 2-4000 year gap of no evidence of human settlement after earlier green period hunter forager populaltions and agrarian popualtions that extend to the present Put these three things together and it weighs toward Eurasian clustering being likely
You simply passing unsubstantiated guesswork for an objective assessment.
And the claim about "2-4000" year gap of "no evidence of human settlement" is not entirely accurate. There are areas of the north which feature relative continuous occupation.
Paucity of evidence is not an airtight proof of lack of occupation; it could be the result of geological formations over the ages, or it could simply speak to the movement of groups to other locales until such time when an environment was ideal again for occupation. It does not serve as proof of "back migration".
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
Paucity of evidence is not an airtight proof of lack of occupation; it could be the result of geological formations over the ages, or it could simply speak to the movement of groups to other locales until such time when an environment was ideal again for occupation. It does not serve as proof of "back migration". [/QB]
As I mentioned these 3 points are not even applying the back-migration theory and speak to who the Maghrebians are today, I suggest more similar to Eurasians ( incl Arabs and Europeans) than they are to other Africans - on average.
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
And the claim about "2-4000" year gap of "no evidence of human settlement" is not entirely accurate. There are areas of the north which feature relative continuous occupation.
please identify these areas in the Maghreb and cultural names
Posts: 43006 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
As I mentioned these 3 points are not even applying the back-migration theory and speak to who the Maghrebians are today, I suggest more similar to Eurasians ( incl Arabs and Europeans) than they are to other Africans - on average.
How are you connecting "Maghrebi" of today with something that happened in the Upper Paleolithic, when they would not have arrived until well after mid-early Holocene?
Again your comparisons are subjective, as you are ignoring data that seemingly conflicts with your opinion.
quote:
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
And the claim about "2-4000" year gap of "no evidence of human settlement" is not entirely accurate. There are areas of the north which feature relative continuous occupation.
please identify these areas in the Maghreb and cultural names
"North Africa" was the context used in your post, and an example of this, would be in the Libyan region, where the so-called "Ibero-Maurusian" and "Caspian" traditions appear to have extended.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
As I mentioned these 3 points are not even applying the back-migration theory and speak to who the Maghrebians are today, I suggest more similar to Eurasians ( incl Arabs and Europeans) than they are to other Africans - on average.
How are you connecting "Maghrebi" of today with something that happened in the Upper Paleolithic, when they would not have arrived until well after mid-early Holocene?
I just said the 3 points are inependant of the back migrtaion theory.
- but if you do then apply that back-migration theory it does contradict point 3 if to apply to modern popualtions. That Henn theory might have a continuity problem
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:Again your comparisons are subjective, as you are ignoring data that seemingly conflicts with your opinion.
It's strong circumstancial evidence, historical anthropological information which is mentioned in genetics articles, spread of islam, colonization etc. origins of haplogroups has a subjective element as well. But affinity is not origins. If a population has higher frequencies of a hap another population might be more similar to them on that basis compared to another group regardless of the originsl origin of the hap. So modern Magrebians may be more similar to Eurasians than other Africans regardless of the origin of the DNA
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
And the claim about "2-4000" year gap of "no evidence of human settlement" is not entirely accurate. There are areas of the north which feature relative continuous occupation.
please identify these areas in the Maghreb and cultural names [/QUOTE]"
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: North Africa" was the context used in your post, and an example of this, would be in the Libyan region, where the so-called "Ibero-Maurusian" and "Caspian" traditions appear to have extended. [/qb]
give and example of a human settlement or remains in Libya after the Capsian but before the Phoenicians a gap period of 2-4000 years
Posts: 43006 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
I just said the 3 points are inependant of the back migrtaion theory.
I guess I wasn't entirely clear on where you were going with your "3 points".
quote:It's strong circumstancial evidence, historical anthropological information which is mentioned in genetics articles, spread of islam, colonization etc. origins of haplogroups has a subjective element as well.
I am not arguing against gene flow from the outside. I am only arguing against the treatment of coastal north Africans as transplants of "west Eurasians" on the African continent.
I am also questioning your comparisons. You seem to repeatedly ignore material that contradicts your preferred narrative of "North Africans being more similar to Eurasians".
quote:give and example of a human settlement or remains in Libya after the Capsian but before the Phoenicians a gap period of 2-4000 years
Ancestors of modern Tamazight-speakers would have followed not long after the so-called Capsian complexes waned. The only "gap" that comes to mind, is one between the EpiPaleolithic Maghrebi and their Aterian predecessors in the upper Paleolithic.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
[QUOTE]give and example of a human settlement or remains in Libya after the Capsian but before the Phoenicians a gap period of 2-4000 years
Ancestors of modern Tamazight-speakers would have followed not long after the so-called Capsian complexes waned. The only "gap" that comes to mind, is one between the EpiPaleolithic Maghrebi and their Aterian predecessors in the upper Paleolithic.
I could easily apply the following to what you said above:
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
Originally posted by The Explorer:Again your comparisons are subjective, as you are ignoring data that seemingly conflicts with your opinion.
"would have" is not evidence. Evidence is things like bone fragments, arrowheads, pottery beads. They found some of these items for Capisans ins several sites. After that as the region is drying where is evedence of human beings living in the Maghreb but befoer the Phoneicans/Sea people? The Libyan Desert is one of the most harsh and arid environments in the world. Over 90% of the population lives by the coast.Most of Libya is desert or semi-desert, with arable land accounting for only about 1 percent of the country's land surface.
Posts: 43006 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
In the chart they cluster closer to West Eurasians than they do other Africans.
You said this already, and what did I say about it?
quote: You say maybe some of these haplogroups are not West Eurasian maybe they are African.
I did not specifically say that, but yes, it is a possibility.
Hg R chromosomes are shared between certain "Eurasians" and some "Africans", but not with others. This doesn't necessarily mean that said ancestry cannot be African in origin.
quote:
Here I agree with the traditional afrocentric position. 1) many Maghrebians look look mulatto. 2) There is a history of foreign occupation (and white slavery) 3) There is a 2-4000 year gap of no evidence of human settlement after earlier green period hunter forager populaltions and agrarian popualtions that extend to the present Put these three things together and it weighs toward Eurasian clustering being likely
You simply passing unsubstantiated guesswork for an objective assessment.
And the claim about "2-4000" year gap of "no evidence of human settlement" is not entirely accurate. There are areas of the north which feature relative continuous occupation.
Paucity of evidence is not an airtight proof of lack of occupation; it could be the result of geological formations over the ages, or it could simply speak to the movement of groups to other locales until such time when an environment was ideal again for occupation. It does not serve as proof of "back migration".
Yes, so that's why I posted this earlier on:
"Haplogroup I is a descendent of suprahaplogroup F (encompassing haplogroup descendents G-T, see Figure 3).
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). "
[QUOTE]give and example of a human settlement or remains in Libya after the Capsian but before the Phoenicians a gap period of 2-4000 years
Ancestors of modern Tamazight-speakers would have followed not long after the so-called Capsian complexes waned. The only "gap" that comes to mind, is one between the EpiPaleolithic Maghrebi and their Aterian predecessors in the upper Paleolithic.
I could easily apply the following to what you said above:
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
Originally posted by The Explorer:Again your comparisons are subjective, as you are ignoring data that seemingly conflicts with your opinion.
"would have" is not evidence. Evidence is things like bone fragments, arrowheads, pottery beads. They found some of these items for Capisans ins several sites. After that as the region is drying where is evedence of human beings living in the Maghreb but befoer the Phoneicans/Sea people? The Libyan Desert is one of the most harsh and arid environments in the world. Over 90% of the population lives by the coast.Most of Libya is desert or semi-desert, with arable land accounting for only about 1 percent of the country's land surface.
And since you have not such "evidence" it makes your hyped up theory bogus!
All you post is "supposedly stuff". Not one time it was backed up by actual facts. Typical Euronut!
As posted before, lets recap who actually did live in the "Libyan desert, for thousands of years"
And more to the South of the "Sahara" you'll find the Fulani at the Sahel. Or is Henn et al. also suggesting an intrusion of Eurasians there before any African population did? I mean, I already have covered the fossil records here. Hmmm, I mean there
As you can see, your hypothetical story sounds nice and all, but is after all extremely ambiguous. Because actual "evidence speaks against it, on many levels!
Posts: 22245 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
[QUOTE]give and example of a human settlement or remains in Libya after the Capsian but before the Phoenicians a gap period of 2-4000 years
Ancestors of modern Tamazight-speakers would have followed not long after the so-called Capsian complexes waned. The only "gap" that comes to mind, is one between the EpiPaleolithic Maghrebi and their Aterian predecessors in the upper Paleolithic.
I could easily apply the following to what you said above:
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
Originally posted by The Explorer:Again your comparisons are subjective, as you are ignoring data that seemingly conflicts with your opinion.
"would have" is not evidence. Evidence is things like bone fragments, arrowheads, pottery beads. They found some of these items for Capisans ins several sites. After that as the region is drying where is evedence of human beings living in the Maghreb but befoer the Phoneicans/Sea people? The Libyan Desert is one of the most harsh and arid environments in the world. Over 90% of the population lives by the coast.Most of Libya is desert or semi-desert, with arable land accounting for only about 1 percent of the country's land surface.
quote:Over 90% of the population lives by the coast
Activity patterns in the Sahara Desert: an interpretation based on cross-sectional geometric properties.
Nikita E, Siew YY, Stock J, Mattingly D, Lahr MM.
Source
University of Cambridge, Leverhulme Center for Human Evolutionary Studies, Fitzwilliam Street, Cambridge, CB2 1QH,
Abstract
quote:
The Garamantian civilization flourished in modern Fezzan, Libya, between 900 BC and 500 AD, during which the aridification of the Sahara was well established. Study of the archaeological remains suggests a population successful at coping with a harsh environment of high and fluctuating temperatures and reduced water and food resources. This study explores the activity patterns of the Garamantes by means of cross-sectional geometric properties. Long bone diaphyseal shape and rigidity are compared between the Garamantes and populations from Egypt and Sudan, namely from the sites of Kerma, el-Badari, and Jebel Moya, to determine whether the Garamantian daily activities were more strenuous than those of other North African populations. Moreover, sexual dimorphism and bilateral asymmetry are assessed at an intra- and inter-population level. The inter-population comparisons showed the Garamantes not to be more robust than the comparative populations, suggesting that the daily Garamantian activities necessary for survival in the Sahara Desert did not generally impose greater loads than those of other North African populations. Sexual dimorphism and bilateral asymmetry in almost all geometric properties of the long limbs were comparatively low among the Garamantes. Only the lower limbs were significantly stronger among males than females, possibly due to higher levels of mobility associated with herding. The lack of systematic bilateral asymmetry in cross-sectional geometric properties may relate to the involvement of the population in bilaterally intensive activities or the lack of regular repetition of unilateral activities.
Am J Phys Anthropol. 2012 Feb;147(2):280-92. doi: 10.1002/ajpa.21645. Epub 2011 Dec 20.
Sahara: Barrier or corridor? Nonmetric cranial traits and biological affinities of North African late Holocene populations. Nikita E, Mattingly D, Lahr MM.
Source
Leverhulme Centre for Human Evolutionary Studies, Department of Biological Anthropology, University of Cambridge, Fitzwilliam Street, Cambridge, UK.
Abstract
quote:
The Garamantes flourished in southwestern Libya, in the core of the Sahara Desert ~3,000 years ago and largely controlled trans-Saharan trade. Their biological affinities to other North African populations, including the Egyptian, Algerian, Tunisian and Sudanese, roughly contemporary to them, are examined by means of cranial nonmetric traits using the Mean Measure of Divergence and Mahalanobis D(2) distance. The aim is to shed light on the extent to which the Sahara Desert inhibited extensive population movements and gene flow. Our results show that the Garamantes possess distant affinities to their neighbors. This relationship may be due to the Central Sahara forming a barrier among groups, despite the archaeological evidence for extended networks of contact. The role of the Sahara as a barrier is further corroborated by the significant correlation between the Mahalanobis D(2) distance and geographic distance between the Garamantes and the other populations under study. In contrast, no clear pattern was observed when all North African populations were examined, indicating that there was no uniform gene flow in the region.
Considering your history you are likely going to claim the Garamantes as foreign too.
Posts: 22245 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
Paucity of evidence is not an airtight proof of lack of occupation; it could be the result of geological formations over the ages, or it could simply speak to the movement of groups to other locales until such time when an environment was ideal again for occupation. It does not serve as proof of "back migration".
As I mentioned these 3 points are not even applying the back-migration theory and speak to who the Maghrebians are today, I suggest more similar to Eurasians ( incl Arabs and Europeans) than they are to other Africans - on average.
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
And the claim about "2-4000" year gap of "no evidence of human settlement" is not entirely accurate. There are areas of the north which feature relative continuous occupation.
please identify these areas in the Maghreb and cultural names
Of which "Maghrebians" do you speak, lioness?
Rif Tafarsit Ichebdanen Ibuqquyen Ait Wayagher Aith 'Ammarth Igzinnayen Themsaman Ait Tuzin Aith Sa'id Aith Wurishik Iqer3ayen. Ibdarsen Ait Bouyahyi Ait Tourish Iznassen Ayt Khaled Ayt Menquch Ayt Aâtiq Ayt Urimmech Chleuh Ait namann Ait Baha, Biougra, Bouzakern Tiznit Zimmur, Ait Ndhir, Ait Yusi, Ait Warayin, Iziyyan, Ait Imyill, Ait Mhand, Ait Massad, Ait Sukhman, Ihansalen, Ait Siddrat, Ait 'Atta, Ait Murghad, Ait Hadiddu, Ait Izdig, Ait 'Ayyash, Ait Saghrushshn Ihahan, Imtuggan, Iseksawen, Idemsiren, Igundafen, Igedmiwen, Imsfiwen, Iglawn, Ait Wawzgit, Id aw-Zaddagh, Ind aw-Zal, Id aw Zkri, Isaffen, Id aw-Kansus, Isuktan, Id aw-Tanan, Ashtuken, Malen, Id aw-Ltit, Ammeln, Ait 'Ali, Mjjat, l-Akhsas, Ait Ba 'Amran, Ait n-Nuss. Kabylie (Algeria) IFLISSEN OUM EL LIL MAATKA AÏT AÏSSI AÏT IRATEN AÏT MENGUELLAT AÏT BETHROUN AÏT SEDKA IGOUCHDAL IFLISSEN LEBHAR AÏT OUAGUENOUN AÏT DJENNAD AÏT IDJER Beni Ziyyat Beni Zejel Beni Selman Beni Bu Zra (ghomara tmazight speakers) Beni Mansur Beni Grir Beni Smih Beni Rzin Sinhaja die tmazight spreken en/of darija Aith seddat aith khannus zarqat ktama aith bshir taghzut beni bu shibt Sinhaja (darija speakers). Beni Gmil Terguist Mix Riffijns/Sinhaja aith mazdui Rif (darjia) Bni Bu Frah Mtiwa Aith Yittuft Bargwata Casa blanca/ rabat Tunisia Djerba Libya Nefousa Tuareg ( Sahara-general) Tamashek Tinariwen (Mali, Algiers en Mauritania) Siwa(Egypte) (Algiers) Chaouia (North East)(Aurès mountains), Chenoua (North central to the coast) Mozabites (North Sahara) (Tunisia) Matmata
Posts: 22245 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
where is the human fossil evidence or artifcacts, arrowheads etc, for people living in the Mahgreb between 2,500 BC and 1000 BC ?
Posts: 43006 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote: Ancestors of modern Tamazight-speakers would have followed not long after the so-called Capsian complexes waned. The only "gap" that comes to mind, is one between the EpiPaleolithic Maghrebi and their Aterian predecessors in the upper Paleolithic.
I could easily apply the following to what you said above
What could you apply to what I said "above"? Subjective? If so, spell out how that can be applied to the above.
quote: "would have" is not evidence.
It's merely scientific jargon for the most likely scenario given the weight of evidence. Scientific norms are apparently new to you.
quote: Evidence is things like bone fragments, arrowheads, pottery beads. They found some of these items for Capisans ins several sites. After that as the region is drying where is evedence of human beings living in the Maghreb but befoer the Phoneicans/Sea people?
Are you familiar with Neolithic remains found in western Africa, to as far as Mali?
And apparently Keita and Brace & co. worked with material on Algerian remains that fall into description you are implying. Familiar with the works of these researchers/team?
On the flip side, where is your evidence for the implied Phoenician occupation of the Maghreb, supposedly prior to indigenous Africans?
quote: The Libyan Desert is one of the most harsh and arid environments in the world. Over 90% of the population lives by the coast.Most of Libya is desert or semi-desert, with arable land accounting for only about 1 percent of the country's land surface.
And?
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: In the same way I'm going to dare you to explain why the male-inherited gene pool of the coastal Magrheb populations is overwhelmingly African?
Its overwhelmingly African because it's the result of drift, just like the equally absurd R-V88 frequencies markers in certain Chadic speakers are the result of drift. No? Then demonstrate that the paternal East African component brought there by Neolithic proto-Berber speakers (e.g., manifested as E-M81 in Y Chromosomal analysis) re-emerges as East African affiliated ancestry when other ancestry informative markers are consulted, that are actually multi-variate (e.g., genome-wide analysis), instead of uni-variate, and therefore, drift sensitive, haplogroup analysis. While you're at it, if drift isn't at work here, explain the discrepancy between the extreme rarity of ancestral clades in between E-M81 and E-M35, even though the former only emerged ~5.6kya from the said predecessors.
This is going to be very entertaining *grabs popcorn*.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: I speak of all Maghrebians
where is the human fossil evidence or artifcacts, arrowheads etc, for people living in the Mahgreb between 2,500 BC and 1000 BC ?
Your question is rhetoric, but first: you need to explain how they navigated back, and please show the fossil records you theorize about all the time...
The older remains in other part of Africa show similarities the younger remains found at the Maghreb, unless you are now going to claim that all those older remains were actually Eurasians/ cacasoids.
I already posted a sum, such as stone tools etc.., which dismisses your claims. And you sure act as if you didn't see it. Posts: 22245 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
Its overwhelmingly African because it's the result of drift
As forecasted, your answer was bound to be pretty indicative of how stupid you are.
The male gene pool of Maghreb populations is essentially lopsidedly African! And know that by "African", I'm really referring to just the stereotyped idea of what "African" is.
For genetic drift to work in this situation, the effective population size of the ancestral Tamazight population(s) would have been quite small. This is inconsistent with what the maternal gene pool in the Maghreb signals.
The Maghreb is one of the areas implicated in the most diversified distribution for E-M78...inconsistent with your "genetic drift" theory.
E-M81 is a descendant clade of E-M35 as is E-M78...consistent with local (African) ancestry.
Tamazight language phylum is entirely unique to Africa. It is not characterized by any Indo-European substratum nor Levantine or Arabian peninsula "Semitic" substratum....again, inconsistent with your UFO-style "European transplant" theory.
quote:just like the equally absurd R-V88 frequencies markers in certain Chadic speakers are the result of drift.
African R-V88 chromosomes do not appear to be a subset of R1b chromosomes found anywhere. It's telling that you feel compelled to refer to it to bolster your fragile theories about the Maghreb.
quote: No? Then demonstrate that the paternal East African component brought there by Neolithic proto-Berber speakers (e.g., manifested as E-M81 in Y Chromosomal analysis) re-emerges as East African affiliated ancestry when other ancestry informative markers are consulted, that are actually multi-variate (e.g., genome-wide analysis), instead of uni-variate, and therefore, drift sensitive, haplogroup analysis.
This chump thinks uniparental markers are "univariate" vs. the "multivariate" supposed "genomewide" analysis. LOL
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Indeed, he "might be", if the gene pool profile of the Maghreb is any indication. Just looking at the person isn't going tell us what his genetic profile is.
Just looking at male folk among the Lemba, isn't going to make us guess that they carry a J clade.
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
LOL @ lioness, the scientist of picking photos of people on the net to make a "scientific" observation.
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: in other words a guy like this might be primarily East African
That's purely your claim! But according to Keita there is a possibility to it.
Here you have a reconstruction of a so - called Mechta-Afalou, with imaginary cosmetics:
Here you have a reconstruction of a Mechta-Afalou, without the imaginary cosmetics.
The common definition:
Definition of AFALOU MAN
quote:: one of an Upper Paleolithic people of northern Africa closely related to Cro-Magnon man but having a broader nose, a sloping forehead, and heavy brow ridges
quote: Craniometric data from seven human groups (Tables 3, 4) were subjected to principal components analysis, which allies the early Holocene population at Gobero (Gob-e) with mid-Holocene “Mechtoids” from Mali and Mauritania [18],[26],[27] and with Late Pleistocene Iberomaurusians and early Holocene Capsians from across the Maghreb:
quote: *Frequently termed Mechta-Afalou or Mechtoid, these were a skeletally robust people and definitely African in origin, though attempts, such as those of Ferembach (1985), to establish similarities with much older and rarer Aterian skeletal remains are tenuous given the immense temporal separation between the two (Close and Wendorf 1990). At the opposite end of the chronological spectrum, dental morphology does suggest connections with later Africans, including those responsible for the Capsian Industry (Irish 2000) and early mid-Holocene human remains from the western half of the Sahara (Dutour 1989), something that points to the Maghreb as one of the regions from which people recolonised the desert (MacDonald 1998).
--Lawrence Barham The First Africans: African Archaeology from the Earliest Toolmakers to Most Recent Foragers (Cambridge World Archaeology)(2008)
For your comparison:
Africans from the so called Bantu region/ sub Sahara/ east Africa.
Posts: 22245 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: For genetic drift to work in this situation, the effective population size of the ancestral Tamazight population(s) would have been quite small. This is inconsistent with what the maternal gene pool in the Maghreb signals.
^You've already had the sh!t slapped out of you when it came to your fabricated concept of (proto)Afro-Asiatic mtDNA, and that North African M1 and U6 was spread by them around the Pleistocene/Holocene border. Since you committed earlier to this fabricated idea, it's going to be particularly entertaining to see you perform your usual acrobatics to compensate for the fact that your aforementioned claim precludes you from (re)implicating these two mtDNAs in mid to late holocene events to make a case for large effective population size for the original pastoral Berber speakers. Just the idea of large population sizes for these Neolithic era pastoral populations sounds pathetically silly, but yeah, let's see which mtDNA L lineages you'll desperately scramble together for this pre-defeated purpose.
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: The Maghreb is one of the areas implicated in the most diversified distribution for E-M78...inconsistent with your "genetic drift" theory.
Even assuming this is true, which I'm not sure of given your reputation of a liar, you don't even know what drift is or what argues against it, otherwise you would not have made this bizarre statement involving some far left Y chromosome carried by a minimal amount of Berber speakers.
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: This chump thinks uniparental markers are "univariate" vs. the "multivariate" supposed "genomewide" analysis.
You don't even know what uni/multi-variate analysis is, just like you don't know what PCA or body linearity is. Prove me wrong that you know what uni/multi-variate analysis is, and that it contradicts with what I said! I bet you your dumbass will either ignore this request (like you ignored the gist of my post) or simply repeat your irrelevant opinion that you think it's false.
Pertinent issues you fled from (your usual M.O. when things get too hot under your paws):
quote: Originally posted by Swenet: While you're at it, if drift isn't at work here, explain the discrepancy between the extreme rarity of ancestral clades in between E-M81 and E-M35, even though the former only emerged ~5.6kya from the said predecessors.
quote: Originally posted by Swenet: Then demonstrate that the paternal East African component brought there by Neolithic proto-Berber speakers (e.g., manifested as E-M81 in Y Chromosomal analysis) re-emerges as East African affiliated ancestry when other ancestry informative markers are consulted
^You've already had the sh!t slapped out of you when it came to your fabricated concept of (proto)Afro-Asiatic mtDNA
There is no such thing as "proto-Afro-Asiatic mtDNA". The irony of your whino post about fabrication, is that you are too stupid to even realize that you're crying about something you fabricated.
quote: and that North African M1 and U6 was spread by them around the Pleistocene/Holocene border.
Irrelevant. U6 an M1 are not the exclusive features of Maghrebi maternal gene pool!
What you need to be focusing on at the moment, is why you haven't accounted for the Maghrebi paternal gene pool that is lopsidedly "African", and their language that is entirely unique to Africa, rather than revisiting subjects you ran away from in other topics.
That's what you do. You run away from a topic, and then bring it up as a distraction in a different topic. This sort of behavior is a defining feature of petty internet trolls.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I put African in quotes, because I am using it in the stereotyped context of what is considered "African" in 'western' research papers.
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
To the chump above (swenet), uniparental markers are not univariate entities. They span multiple loci, some more variable than others, as any other segment of the human genome. This is not cranio-morphometric analysis where individual features are examined for their variability.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I haven't extensively looked at the phylogenetic characteristics of U5, but an African origin cannot be ruled out, based on a few tidbits I've heard about the clade.
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: There is no such thing as "proto-Afro-Asiatic mtDNA".
You're conjuring up distractions and you're not addressing what I'm telling you. The reason is obvious; you can't. I correctly anticipated that you'd use M1 and/or U6 as evidence of large effective population sizes for proto-Berber speakers and I stopped you dead in your tracks by making you face your earlier ridiculous commitment to the idea that M1 and U6 were spread by proto-Afrasan speakers around the same time as the Natufians. You presented U6 and M1 as clades that were spread by proto-Afrasan speakers, totally ignoring the fact that your silly theory is at odds with the evidence, from the glaring lack of ''Ogolian'' Maghrebi archaeological sites interpretable as associated with proto-Afrasan peoples, to the inconvenient fact that the molecular characteristics of these clades point to events that happened way before this, to the inconvenient fact that certain old Maghrebi-specific M1 and U6 subclades (M1b and U6a1) in other branches of Afasan cannot be attributed to common inheritance from proto-Afrasans, but represent admixture.
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: What you need to be focusing on at the moment, is why you haven't accounted for the Maghrebi paternal gene pool that is lopsidedly "African"
I already did, and not only did you not address my explanation, being the coward that you are, you also refrained from defending your objections (i.e., the patently stupid assertion that alleged M78 diversity rules out drift or that there were large effective population sizes), after I obliterated them. Repeat:
While you're at it, if drift isn't at work here, explain the discrepancy between the extreme rarity of ancestral clades in between E-M81 and E-M35, even though the former only emerged ~5.6kya from the said predecessors. --Swenet Then demonstrate that the paternal East African component brought there by Neolithic proto-Berber speakers (e.g., manifested as E-M81 in Y Chromosomal analysis) re-emerges as East African affiliated ancestry when other ancestry informative markers are consulted --Swenet
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: To the chump above (swenet), uniparental markers are not univariate entities. They span multiple loci, some more variable than others, as any other segment of the human genome. This is not cranio-morphometric analysis where individual features are examined for their variability.
Lol, this loon thinks that the loci that are involved with haplogroup assignment are the same thing as variables. They're not dumbass, as they're not used as standalone variables that, together, measure more than one thing. In other words, they don't lead to more than one factual haplogroup assignment. The most important reason why there is more than one locus is to account for homoplasy. As I suspected, you're hopelessly deprived of any sense that could clue you in on the fact that you have no idea, whatsoever, what you talking about. Evidence for this is your horribly misplaced suggestion that the term 'multi-variate' has no applicability outside the field of morphometrics.
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: and their language that is entirely unique to Africa,
What the hell does this have to do with whether their M81 levels are truly representative for how much East African ancestry Maghrebi populations have in their overall genome, that can be attributed to pastoral proto-Berber speakers? Answer: nothing, but you just thought you'd randomly insert that trivial observation, because you're random like that.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
The Algerian Mozabites have the highest frequencies of U6 in the world (except for a small sub-population in the Canary Islands}
ALGERIAN MOZABITES
quote:Originally posted by Doctoris Scientia:
Mozabites
. Portrait of a Mozabite man Stock Photo ID:42-24150866 Date Photographed:1949 Corbis Images
(detail) Mozibite family of women, in Africa, in the 1920s Stock Photo ID:IH155539 Date Photographed:ca. 1920s Corbis Images
[/QB]
Explorer above are some Algerian Mozabite berbers. They have the highest frequencies of U6 in the world. If you don't like my selections for average Mozabites then it's still reasonable to get a sense of what an average Mozabite looks like. Anthropology takes note of these things and is not purely genetics.
If Mozabites have the highest frequencies of U6 and I think many people would agree with me that the average Mozabite looks mulatto, many with lighter yellowish brown skin, and looking different the East Africans such as the man below -and given that they have very high frequencies of M81 doens' this suggest that maybe they are not primarily of East African descent?
I think there is a place for ttaking a look around at what people look like on average in a region (not simply the individuals that we like the looks of) and considering that along with genetics and not soley relying on genetics to replace anthropology.
Posts: 43006 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: doens' this suggest that maybe they are not primarily of East African descent?
Mozabites should be at least 70% African if their haplogroup percentages are taken literally and one counts mtDNA M1 and U6 as African. As a reference, Oprah is 89% African in her ancestry. It goes without saying that 30% Eurasian ancestry in Mozabites cannot make them as pale as the majority evidently is. It's preposterous, really.
What genomewide analysis shows:
quote:We show that the Mozabite have inherited roughly 78% ancestry from a European-related population and 22% ancestry from a population related to sub-Saharan Africans. Our analysis also shows that the Mozabite admixture has occurred over a period that began at least 100 generations ago (~2,800 years ago), and that has continued into the present day. We are able to infer small, ancient, ancestry segments in the Mozabite, and we demonstrate that the segments show considerable drift relative to all the other HGDP populations, consistent with the historical isolation of the Mozabite population.
--Price et al 2009
What some confused ideologue on the internet wants you to believe:
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: So, yes, I'd say modern Maghrebi populations are primarily African.
posted
Still dumb as ever. Still don't get it....huh?
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:
Mozabites should be at least 70% African if their haplogroup percentages are taken literally and one counts mtDNA M1 and U6 as African. As a reference, Oprah is 89% African in her ancestry. It goes without saying that 30% Eurasian ancestry in Mozabites cannot make them as pale as the majority evidently is.
quote:: [/b]
Man are you thick!!! Skin pigmentation and lineage are....NOT related. Dumb Phucgk!!
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Where is that UV map? I know you are not scientifically astute ...but ...trust me...it works. He! He! Good god! Why argue with you?
-------------------- 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
Keep my name out your mouth, gramps. You get no attention.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
LMAOH First Xyzman's stupidity is exposed by Beyoku and now lyinass' is exposed by Troll Patrol!
quote:Originally posted by the lyinass,: This is interesting. Ottomans sultans in North Africa had European white women slaves in their harems. We knew that I have whole threads on that topic. (Morocc however never came under Ottoman dominance, was not one of the Barbary States but they did have slaves) But there were many times more male captives then women. But the part about white European slave men sent to breeding farms with Senegalese women and produce mulattoes. That's a new one on me. The offspring would probably have been more sub saharan than most North Africans. How common this was I have no idea I don't know how they would be identified at this point living in North Africa. Maybe they got called berbers ?
wiki:
Over 150,000 men from sub-Saharan Africa served in his elite Black Guard. By the time of Ismail's death, the guard had grown tenfold, the largest in Moroccan history.
perhaps this might account for some of the L linegages in modern Morrocans.
Mitochondrial lineages are only passed by WOMEN not men, dummy! LOLPosts: 26352 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Also Explorer wasn't it you not long ago who when asked about where do all these tawny skinned North Africans come from you would say white women slaves of tha Barbary? -and Troll Patrol adding expulsion of the Moriscos ?
It if that is the case then what are the foreign haplogroups of berbers?
Posts: 43006 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ LOL Just because I agree with someone else does not make me their "lackey". You're just mad that Beyoku debunked your dumbass and now vent your intellectual short-comings out on me.
quote:Originally posted by the lyinass,: If Mozabites have the highest frequencies of U6 and I think many people would agree with me that the average Mozabite looks mulatto, many with lighter yellowish brown skin, and looking different the East Africans such as the man below -and given that they have very high frequencies of M81 doens' this suggest that maybe they are not primarily of East African descent?
So you seem to be saying that the Mozabites' light complexion comes from their U6 bearing ancestors. But what is the actual proof for this?? Do you have any evidence on how their U6 forebears looked like at all let alone skin color? Apparently you're unaware that there are other Maghrebi and other African populations who carry U6 but are quite darker.
Also the young man in the photo below is NOT 'East African' but a North African Berber from Fezzan Libya or Algeria. I forgot which area.
quote:
Troll Patrol, thanks for posting the pic above. I myself first posted the picture months ago, actually last year in one of the countless threads on North Africans and Berbers but unfortunately I couldn't find it. It probably got deleted.
The reason why I posted it in the first place was to show that he had the same profile as King Jubba.
quote:Lyinass continues: I think there is a place for taking a look around at what people look like on average in a region (not simply the individuals that we like the looks of) and considering that along with genetics and not soley relying on genetics to replace anthropology.
And exactly what good will this do. How a people look now may not reflect what their original ancestors looked like. For example, many southern Europeans carry E lineages from black African ancestors yet don't look black at all.
Posts: 26352 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Beyoku...? You don't even understand what Beyoku did. he is quoting shyte he doesn't understand. Quoting Dienkess, eg who basically said the same thing as I. Being slick, leaving off data(K2-8) ...thinking it would NOT be noticed.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ LOL Just because I agree .. make me their "lackey". You're just mad that Beyoku debunked ...short-comings out on me:) [
BTW - I don't take anything out on someone for someone else. ANYONE can and will feel it if they fukgkup. Of course there are those who get a small...pass.
But you DJ are a two-timing, sneaky SOB. So....man up some ..cousin.
In fact you are more suspicious than Lioness. His con is childish. But you...I am still trying to put my hands on your con.
Sweetness is a straight-up idiot.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic