posted
Since there are one or two who can follow.. let’s continue. Back to the study.
I assume they write this with the belief that there aren’t any black people or objective white people who can understand this stuff. Admittedly it took me a few years to get it. There are some gems in the study ie dead give away. Talk about a play on words. Damn these people are crafty. Let’s point them out. I hope Dienkess is reading this…..
Quote:
The Nuragic populations appear to be part of a large and geographically unstructured cluster of modern European populations, thus making it difficult to infer their evolutionary relationships. However, the low levels of genetic diversity, both within and among ancient samples, as opposed to the sharp differences among modern Sardinian samples, support the hypothesis of the expansion of a small group of maternally related individuals, a
Translation: That is an outright lie. They hinted at an evolutionary relation ship within the study. They cannot suggest northern Europe because there was no comparable civilization north of Sardinia in Europe. Thus they chose Iberia. Avoiding the geographically closest region ie North Africa, which had a similar civilization. In addition what they are saying is these people later EXPANDED into Europe.
Quote: The population of Sardinia is one of the main European genetic outliers. When compared with populations from all over the world, Sardinians are clearly part of a European genetic cluster. However, they differ sharply from their European and Italian neighbours, SO MUCH SO that they are often excluded from multivariate analyses, lest all other European samples appear identical in comparison and Y-chromosome haplotypes that are rare elsewhere in Europe occur at higher frequencies in Sardinia, and an extensive linkage disequilibrium has been described for autosomal markers. In addition, unusually strong genetic differences are observed among Sardinian communities, both for allele-frequency polymorphisms.
Translation: Sardinians sub-stratum is not European. They are North Africans. Another example of Europeans, yet again, stealing ancient African civilization as their own.
Quote: . These two sequences find no match in comparisons with 92 Africanfrican samples EITHER (data not given). Six haplotypes are shared between modern and ancient Sardinians, representing 61% of the ancient individuals
Translation: strange choice of words…”EITHER” plus, “data not shown” . Looks like they are trying to prove no connection with Africa. Although the data clearly shows a connection.
Quote: All outliers are either populations separated by large geographic distances from the other Europeans ([mainly North Africans and Central Asians), or well-known.
Translation: This is an outright lie. Did they look at a world map and calculated geographic distances? Maybe they thought we wouldn’t. Lioness I know you are mathematically challenge. See notes on Fig 3. the CIRCLE – These European regions are further from Sardinia than North Africa. Estonia, Iceland, Holland, Switzland, etc What is astonishing is they included North African Berbers as Europeans to bring the overall European group closer to the Nuragic. After initially admitting the Sardinians are outliers compared to other Europeans. Man, talk about manipulating data.
Quote: In the multidimensional scaling of Fig. 3, Nuragic Sardinians cluster with the majority of the European populations. Given the small sample size, inevitable in ancient DNA studies, it is at present impossible to infer their evolutionary relationships from mtDNA aYnities. Nevertheless, in relation with ancient samples, Nuragic Sardinians appear more related to the Iberians than to the Etruscans, whose position in the graph is eccentric. Three data points are not enough for a robust generalisation. However, one can at least conclude that Sardinians and Iberians show a greater genealogical continuity with the Bronze-Age inhabitants of the same regions than the Tuscans. To better understand the processes leading to these differences it will be necessary to genetically characterise people who lived in those areas between 2,000 years ago and the present time.
Translation: Enough said, according to the authors they were probably Iberians migrants. Although using the same yardstick …they should be classified as North Africans migrants.
There you have it….any challengers?????
-------------------- 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
Some may ask , how does this relate to the Henn study(Title of the thread), My point is, Henn got it wrong. Peoples of North Africa are NOT recipients of genes from the so-called Middle East. AMH primarily went through North Africa into Europe. This is really becoming clear now.
Here is another clue. Understanding geographical location plays are very important part. Note the linguistic isolates. Dr Winters may help me out here but….there is a reason why, starting from the West to East, the Iberians, Basque, Nuragic (Sardinia), Etruscan, Crete are linguistic isolates. Because they spill over migrants from North Africa. These regions circumnavigate North Africa. It makes geographic sense. You may throw the Celts in the mix. It is all coming together,
This is some good stuff. I need to post on ESR. He! He! He!
-------------------- 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 |
Djehuti is right: nothing in table 4 contradicts what he said. Get that eyecrust out ya eye. Not only does the North African sample lag behind most of the modern samples in haplotype sharing with this ancient sample, many of the ancient Sardinians belong to haplotypes that don't even occur in the North African sample.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Come on Lioness Production – get your crew together. One of you can try to prove I am wrong.
-------------------- 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 |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: I don't know how these findings contradict what I said. And yes you are being a bit condescending for someone who seems new to this stuff let alone not an expert.
LOL as if your pretentious dumbass tongue-twisting self ("Will Smith doesnt look Nubian") is an expert. LOL!
Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Swenet..brotha you are out of your league. You don’t get… reserve your comments for someone else. You remark was already addressed by the Sage. Go someplace else.
This is not a pissing contest. Plus I have a bigger dick…You would never win.
I will tell you what I always tell Lioness…read it several times and you will realize how ridiculous and dumb your remark is…anyone else?
If you have a question to ask ..ask it. Do away with the crust and carrot comment. He!.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you can’t understand what the Table is telling you. I will explain. But give it a shot first. Sage is on to it already. The knee jerk reaction is what you just said or interpreted the data, which is what the authors wanted. But the devil is in the details. Hint: The crafty part is in their choice of words. Eg “cluster” instead of “origin”. That way you can never say they lied. Of course they cluster but they question is “point of origin”. Lioness did not get either. There…I made it easy….it is right in front of you!!
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Swenet..brotha you are out of your league. You don’t get… reserve your comments for someone else. You remark was already addressed by the Sage. Go someplace else.
This is not a pissing contest. Plus I have a bigger dick…You would never win.
I will tell you what I always tell Lioness…read it several times and you will realize how ridiculous and dumb your remark is…anyone else?
If you have a question to ask ..ask it. Do away with the crust and carrot comment. He!.
Just shut up xyyman. Shut up with all that wolfing, and read your own phuckn data, crusty eyed nutcase:
Ancient Haplotype yield 1:
North Africa freq: 9.6 - Europe freq: 13.3
Ancient Haplotype yield 2:
North Africa freq: 2.4 - Europe freq: 2.6
Ancient Haplotype yield 3:
North Africa freq: 0.4 - Europe freq: 1.4
Ancient Haplotype yield 4:
North Africa freq: absent - Europe freq: 0.1
Ancient Haplotype yield 5:
North Africa freq: absent - Europe freq: 0.3
Ancient Haplotype yield 6:
North Africa freq: absent - Europe freq: 0.0 (next to Europe, it says ''0'' but a single European individual carried it)
Ancient Haplotype yield 7:
North Africa freq: absent - Europe freq: 0.6
Ancient Haplotype yield 8:
North Africa freq: 1.5 - Europe freq: 0.0 (next to Europe, it says ''0'' but a single European individual carried it)
posted
Hmmm! Maybe I am giving you too much credit? I will give you and others a few days, if you still don’t get it I will explain
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thought so: no response to what I said. Just another self promoting rant that compares nicely with your known reputation of being a jackass who talks endlessly, but isn't saying anything. Meanwhile, this is going on in objective reality (which xyyman's mental faculties aren't tuned into):
Ancient Haplotype yield 1:
North Africa freq: 9.6 - Europe freq: 13.3
Ancient Haplotype yield 2:
North Africa freq: 2.4 - Europe freq: 2.6
Ancient Haplotype yield 3:
North Africa freq: 0.4 - Europe freq: 1.4
Ancient Haplotype yield 4:
North Africa freq: absent - Europe freq: 0.1
Ancient Haplotype yield 5:
North Africa freq: absent - Europe freq: 0.3
Ancient Haplotype yield 6:
North Africa freq: absent - Europe freq: 0.0 (next to Europe, it says ''0'' but a single European individual carried it)
Ancient Haplotype yield 7:
North Africa freq: absent - Europe freq: 0.6
Ancient Haplotype yield 8:
North Africa freq: 1.5 - Europe freq: 0.0 (next to Europe, it says ''0'' but a single European individual carried it)
Ancient Haplotype yield 9:
Absent in all modern samples
Ancient Haplotype yield 10:
Absent in all the used modern samples
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
I said I will give you some time...read it several times I will get back to you.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Translation: That is an outright lie. They hinted at an evolutionary relation ship within the study. They cannot suggest northern Europe because there was no comparable civilization north of Sardinia in Europe. Thus they chose Iberia. Avoiding the geographically closest region ie North Africa, which had a similar civilization. In addition what they are saying is these people later EXPANDED into Europe.
Translation: Sardinians sub-stratum is not European. They are North Africans. Another example of Europeans, yet again, stealing ancient African civilization as their own.
xyyman _________________Swenet
xyyman, I realize your're not in to arhaeology but here's a little history lesson for context
The most ancient human trace in Sardinia could be referred to the discovery of the fossil of an Oreopithecus bambolii, a prehistoric anthropomorphic primate, dated 8.5 million years ago. In 1979 human remains were found that were dated to 150,000 BC[citation needed]. In 2004, in a cave in Logudoro a human finger bone was found that was dated up to 250,000 BC.
Chronology of Pre-Nuragic Sardinia
Archeological cultures of Sardinia in the pre-Nuragic period:[1]
In the Stone Age the island was inhabited by people who had arrived there in the Palaeolithic and Neolithic ages from several parts of Europe and the Mediterranean area.
Cardium Pottery or Filiestru culture (6000-4000 BC)
Bonu Ighinu culture (4000-3400 BC)
San Ciriaco culture (3400-3200 BC)
The most ancient settlements have been discovered both in Gallura and central Sardinia; later several cultures developed in the island, such as the Ozieri culture.
Ozieri culture (3200-2700 BC)
Abealzu-Filigosa culture (2700-2400 BC)
Monte Claro culture (2400-2100 BC)
Bell Beaker culture (2100-1800 BC)
Bonnanaro culture (A phase) (1800-1600 BC)
Monte d'Accoddi is an archaeological site in northern Sardinia, Italy, located in the territory of Sassari near Porto Torres. It is the site of a megalithic structure dated to around 2700-2000 BC Pre-Nuragic Sardinia Prehistoric temple of Monte d'Accoddi, perhaps the oldest building in Italy. The altar of Monte d'Accoddi fell out of use starting from c. 2000 BC, when the Beaker culture, which at the time was widespread in almost all western Europe, appeared in the island.
Nuragic Era
1800 BC - 200 AD
Nuragic Era Sardinia is characterised by stone structures called nuraghe, of which there are more than 8,000. The most famous is the complex of Barumini in the province of Medio Campidano. The nuraghe were mainly built in the period from about 1800 to 1200 BC, though many were used until the Roman period. Next to these were built holy water-places (for example Santa Cristina, Sardara) and dolmens.
It is known that the Sardinians had contact with the Myceneans, who traded with the western Mediterranean. Contact with powerful cities of Crete, such as Kydonia, is clear from pottery recovered in archaeological excavations in Sardinia. Nuragic Civilisation: Bronze Archer. Nuraghe Losa
quote:Originally posted by xyyman:They cannot suggest northern Europe because there was no comparable civilization north of Sardinia in Europe.
France 4700 BC Tumulus of Bougon 4700 BC ___________________________________________________
xyyman look at the geography, it's a samll Island, the continuing error you make is the same error you made with the Tunisians you are not taking into account isolation of certain populations causing given population to have a more homogenous, unique looking genetic profle.
An Overview of the Genetic Structure within the Italian Population from Genome-Wide Data
average admixture proportion is widespread across all over the Sardinia island, with no geographic clustering, underlining an internal genetic homogeneity among the Sardinians. At the same time, this admixture proportion could be the signature of a common ancient genetic background of all the continental European populations but the isolation of the Sardinians have preserved this ancestry. The recent sequencing of the Iceman's genome, argues strongly in favor of the hypothesis that at least continental Europeans, living 5,300 years ago, were more similar to the current Sardinians
but xyyman I'm going to help you out now but it's going to take some money:
An afro-european and euro-african human pathway through Sardinia, with notes on humanity’s world-wide water traversals and proboscidean comparisons
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: I see xyyman is reaching as usual:
Djehuti is right: nothing in table 4 contradicts what he said. Get that eyecrust out ya eye. Not only does the North African sample lag behind most of the modern samples in haplotype sharing with this ancient sample, many of the ancient Sardinians belong to haplotypes that don't even occur in the North African sample.
And this is how Euronuts get one step ahead of some Africanists. Posts: 26286 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
@ Swenet As I said earlier, the issue is not who is “clustering” with whom. The issue is “origin” ie migration route ie source population. I know some are slower than others, but what you posted does NOT reveal the migration route(origin) of the Nuragic Sardinians.
I guessed you missed it. Let me repeat. “Clustering” is a con word used by the authors to imply origin. Just as Caucasoid is used to imply Europeans.
Origin = Source Clustering = grouping (remember I said they included Berbers in Fig 3). You do understand why?
So let me ask it again. Where did the Nuragic Sardinians originate? The authors suggested Iberia. Note I did not say cluster. I am not going to repeat it again. I know I know…I love to rant. He! He!
BTW: After reading your post…. I see you do understand the word “frequency” now.
It will take some work but I will deprogram you yet. It took me awhile.
I have gotten past the word “Caucasoid”. I am now working on word “Clustering”. Word of advice – pay close attention to the words used in these studies.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hmmmm. What are you up to Lioness? This basically supports my point of view. This is the 2nd time. The 1st was that study you found and showed me. I posted it on ESR, showing the highest frequency of mtDNA Hg-HV in Mali/Burkina-Faso area of Africa.
You costing me money man. That 2nd one looks really interesting. The title sounds like something I may want to sink my teeth into. EurAfricans(Berbers) in Sardinia...
But I will get back to Swenet in a few days on the Table. Hope he figures it out by then.
Quote by Lioness Production: An Overview of the Genetic Structure within the Italian Population from Genome-Wide Data
average admixture proportion is widespread across all over the Sardinia island, with no geographic clustering, underlining an internal genetic homogeneity among the Sardinians. At the same time, this admixture proportion could be the signature of a common ancient genetic background of all the continental European populations but the isolation of the Sardinians have preserved this ancestry. The recent sequencing of the Iceman's genome, argues strongly in favor of the hypothesis that at least continental Europeans, living 5,300 years ago, were more similar to the current Sardinians
and
An afro-european and euro-african human pathway through Sardinia, with notes on humanity’s world-wide water traversals and proboscidean comparisons
-------------------- 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 |
See Sardinia is West of Etrusca, Tunisia(Africa) is to the immediate south. Germany, Iceland, FRANCE, Denmark are thousands of miles away to the north. That is why geography is so important. Now you can see why Etrusca is on the Western side of the Italian Peninsula.
I was always puzzled by why the western side. Why would migrants from Turkey relocate on the western shores of Italian mainland. I did not read up on the Nuragic then. It all makes sense. Here now is the genetic and archeological proof.
-------------------- 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
Understanding geographical location plays are very important part. Note the linguistic isolates. Dr Winters may help me out here but….there is a reason why, starting from the West to East, the Iberians, Basque, Nuragic (Sardinia), Etruscan, Crete are linguistic isolates. Because they are spill over migrants from North Africa. These regions circumnavigate North Africa. It makes geographic sense. You may throw the Celts in the mix.
It all makes sense. Germany, Holland etc are thousands of miles away compared to North Africa.
EUROPEANS STEALING AFRICAN HISTORY!!!
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
International Journal of Modern Anthropology Int. J. Mod. Anthrop. 1 : 1-121 (2008) Available online at www.ata.org.tn
Sardinian Population (Italy): a Genetic Review
Quote: The study of HLA suggests important contacts between Sardinia and northern Africa highlighted by high frequency of haplotype A*33-Cw*08-B*14. Also haplotype A*30-Cw*0501-B*18, which has a high frequency in Sardinia (12.5%) has an African origin, from which it expanded towards the Middle East (Grimaldi et al., 2001).
Any questions?? I repeat the migration was from North Africa INTO Europe.
Berbers are NOT admixed.
Henn et al got it wrong. North Africans are NOT the recipients of Middle Eastern or European genes. They are the donors.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
xyyman I gave you several Sardinia cultures before Nuragic. Some had similar stone strucures. I gave you a similar stone structure 3000 years older in France after you said Europe had "no comparable civilization North of Sardinia in Europe" And it is known that the Sardinians had contact with the Myceneans yet you ignored it. Where's my apology?
-and where are the similar stone structures in ancient North Africa? _Big problem xy Name the forefather NA culture, that should be fundamental to your argument for "stealing African history"
And history is what is documented by writing conetemporary to it. And tell us what precisely was stolen Where is the evidence that there was a transfer of technology from N Africa to Sardinia? basic issue And why do you focus on Sardinia when the much shorter over water distance over Gibralter to Iberia?
One big problem in your thesis is that you are using Paleolithic genetics to expalin Neolithic technology.
Posts: 42938 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
A rather broad statement since 'Berbers' encompass many ethnic groups. Surely you don't think the light-skinned 'mulatto' types and especially the white types are not pure indigenous African!
quote:Henn et al got it wrong. North Africans are NOT the recipients of Middle Eastern or European genes. They are the donors.
That depends on which genes or alleles. Of course they 'donated' many genes to Europe and the Middle-East but to say the opposite did not happen would be ignoring centuries of history. Posts: 26286 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Quote : there is a reason why, starting from the West to East, the Iberians, Basque, Nuragic (Sardinia), Etruscan, Crete are linguistic isolates. Because they are spill over migrants from North Africa. These regions circumnavigate North Africa. It makes geographic sense.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: And why do you focus on Sardinia when the much shorter over water distance over Gibralter to Iberia?
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
OK, I finally got to peruse the report and its supplement so now I can comment on more than just Table 4 (last post). But first, the table's missing 8 NAs, 1 NE, and 12 Euros indicated in the supplementary material (and there's slop in the investigation's MDS too).
To recap, the table clearly shows only two populations carry exactly ht1, ht2, ht3, and ht8; modern Sardinians and North Africans (a pool of Algerians, Egyptians, Arab and Berber Moroccans, and Tunisian Berbers). What say the authors?
quote: Genetic variation in Sardinia appears limited across time as well. Six haplotypes observed in the Nuragic sample are still present in the modern Ogliastra and Sardinia samples, and they include ... rarer sequences ... AL07, ST16, and CA14-SE13 ... in North Africa; their presence in both modern and Nuragic Sardinia suggest the effects of common ancestry or ancient gene flow, rather than those of gene flow in historical times.
Also since the sampled modern Sardinians and North Africans show a 1:1 Nuragic sequences correspondance what the authors say about the one also applies to the other. Eg., N Africans, modern and ancient Sardinians, share four haplotypes and that represents 56.6% of the ancient individuals.
Fig. 3 the MDS plot leaves Algerians, Egyptians, and Moroccan Arabs out of the Nuragic Sardinians cluster or inner circle. So I assume Moroccan Berbers and Tunisians Berbers are the North Africans sharing 3 of the rarer Nuragic haplotypes with modern Sardinians sampled. Makes me wonder if the sampled Algerians of Corte-Real's study were non-Berber? In effect the authors have turned Berbers into Europeans in Fig. 3's captioning. They are in the inner circle. (There is a question of Tunisian Berber placement within or outside the circle cluster, their plot position appears negated by the caption.)
I didn't catch any Iberian origin pointing, just the authors' comparing the 3 ancient samples Nuragia, Etruria, and Iberia. As I see it they're saying that of the two ancients sampled, Iberia is closer to Nuragia than Etruria in its low count of total sequences. The authors 7th-6th century BCE dating for ancient Iberian samples seems too late for Nuragic origins.
Per the study one could say 56.6% of Nuragic Sardinians share maternal ancestry with Berbers of H J and V haplogroups because of older ties or trade. For whatever it means Nuragic Sardinians are younger than Maghrebis but that doesn't answer the source of the women bearing the haplotypes. Genetics alone simply cannot answer questions of original vs exported technologies.
Sorry, but unlike with Kefi, I haven't checked sequences for L or U alternatives.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
A rather broad statement since 'Berbers' encompass many ethnic groups. Surely you don't think the light-skinned 'mulatto' types and especially the white types are not pure indigenous African!
that is what he has been saying for weeks now in this thread and in the thread Was the Maghreb really predominantly Eurasian for 30,000 yrs? now on page 2 of Egyptology forum another thread also
quote: Originally posted by Swenet: Guess this upsets Stoneking et al's claim that a single OOA migration is implicated by the statistically identical levels of Neanderthal DNA introgressions in modern non-African populations across the globe.
^Still haven't read the paper so I don't know if the authors themselves realized it, but this is the real gem to focus on. If the findings of this paper prove true, it could mean two things:
1) East Asians are exclusively descended from the same OOA migration that gave rise to West Eurasian AMHs, but experienced extra archaic human introgressions AFTER the East Asian/European AMH split.
2) East Asians are composed of the same OOA migration that gave rise to West Eurasian AMHs, PLUS additional AMH/Neanderthal (alamgam) source(s), that is older than, and didn't contribute to, the European AMH collective.
If 2 proves to be true, this will have many implications for the Middle/Upper Palaeolithic African populations near the African exit points, and their affinities to contemporary Africans who resided away from those exit points, in inner Africa. Why? Because with more than one OOA migration, butt hurt proponents can no longer use the convenient ''coincidence'' excuse for glaring fact that non-Africans have no mtDNA L, independent of African admixture events.
But, of course, scenario 2 is already supported by things like the lack of Neanderthals in East Asia, the relatively late settlement of Europe compared to places along the Southern migration route, like Australia, despite Europe's closeness to Africa and the fact that non-African AMHs don't look like they belong to a single population, morphologically speaking, even when taking the rather high AMH inter-sample variability into account.
Also, the lack of mtDNA L in Eurasians that diverges from African mtDNA L examples since (before) the earliest AMH exodus, plus the lack of African NRY M89, mtDNA M and mtDNA N examples in black Africans that do the same. The conclusion seems inescapable: black Africans descend from different AMHs than non-Africans do.
(liberating thread from albino obsessed other forum)
Posts: 42938 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
@ Sage- it is refreshing to see that some of us can read and intepret data. Yes "common ancestry" is the "gimme".
Thought I was discussing this with dounces.
Yes, they are talking Tunisian Berbers as co-ancestry. Why I think they are suggesting Iberia as the source population?
Quote; "Nuragic Sardinians appear more related to the Iberians"
and
"However, one can at least conclude that Sardinians and Iberians show a greater genealogical continuity Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
However, one can at least conclude that Sardinians and North Africans(Tunisians)show a greater genealogical continuity
also- as I pointed out earlier. Why include Berbers as Europeans. That will skew the perception bringing into European circle. They are cheating. In the introduction they already stated that Sardinians are an outlier and when plotted with Europeans, all OTHER Europeans cluster as one. So to skew the result they included NA Berbers as Europeans knowing fully well Sardinians will now cluster closer to Europeans.
The logical thing to do would be exclude Berbers if they wanted to show genetic relatedness between Sardinians and Europeans. But if they did that then there would be clear dis-similarity between Europeans and Nuragic.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- 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
^ Okay?? I fail to see how your and Tukuler's conclusion contradicts anything I said. Again for the third time, I never denied African influence from the Maghreb spreading into Mediterranean Europe prior to the expansion of peoples from the Eastern Mediterranean specifically Asia. However, the conclusion of the paper is a far cry from what I believe you are proposing and which is that Nuragic culture is solely a product of Africa.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by xyyman:
Berbers are NOT admixed.
A rather broad statement since 'Berbers' encompass many ethnic groups. Surely you don't think the light-skinned 'mulatto' types and especially the white types are not pure indigenous African!
that is what he has been saying for weeks now in this thread and in the thread Was the Maghreb really predominantly Eurasian for 30,000 yrs? now on page 2 of Egyptology forum another thread also
I thought he just said Berbers are NOT admixed, even though Berbers are a variegated group.
quote:
[
Exactly what are YOU trying to say with this picture spam of yours??
Posts: 26286 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Okay?? I fail to see how your and Tukuler's conclusion contradicts anything I said. Again for the third time, I never denied African influence from the Maghreb spreading into Mediterranean Europe prior to the expansion of peoples from the Eastern Mediterranean specifically Asia. However, the conclusion of the paper is a far cry from what I believe you are proposing and which is that Nuragic culture is solely a product of Africa.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by xyyman:
Berbers are NOT admixed.
A rather broad statement since 'Berbers' encompass many ethnic groups. Surely you don't think the light-skinned 'mulatto' types and especially the white types are not pure indigenous African!
that is what he has been saying for weeks now in this thread and in the thread Was the Maghreb really predominantly Eurasian for 30,000 yrs? now on page 2 of Egyptology forum another thread also
I thought he just said Berbers are NOT admixed, even though Berbers are a variegated group.
quote:
[
Exactly what are YOU trying to say with this picture spam of yours??
you were acting suprised he was saying berbers were not admixted. I was saying he has been saying this for the past few weeks so it shouldn't come as a surprise.
The examples, a couple of lighter skinned berbers whom xyyman might say have a phsyical appearance of which does not exclude them from possibly being not admixted
that their appearance does not exclude them from being possibly pure unmixed Africans
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: That's all folks....
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by xyyman:
@ Sage- it is refreshing to see that some of us can read and intepret data. Yes "common ancestry" is the "gimme".
Thought I was discussing this with dounces.
Yes, they are talking Tunisian Berbers as co-ancestry. Why I think they are suggesting Iberia as the source population?
Quote; "Nuragic Sardinians appear more related to the Iberians"
and
"However, one can at least conclude that Sardinians and Iberians show a greater genealogical continuity
Again, please consider the full context of those statements. It's an "ancients only DNA" comparison. Iberia and Etruria are the only ancient samples they have to compare.
Quote [read contextually]; "Nuragic Sardinians appear more related to the Iberians" [than to the Etruscans]
and "However, one can at least conclude that Sardinians and Iberians show a greater genealogical continuity [than Siberians and Etruscans]
OK, I'd agree Nuragic common ancestry with Tunisians still begs the question of source but Tunisian gene flow indicates, at the very least, some part of the Nuragic source populations. And the authors unambiguously credit no other "common ancestry or ancient gene flow" sample mums than North Africas (specifically Tunisians judging from Rosa&Brehm's maps of African H V and J though U6 would be the show stopping monkey, maybe I will check the given sequences for L and/or U possibilities).
Another thing I noticed the authors consider every sample population to be "European" not just the NAs.
@DJ Didn't know I was attempting to contradict whatever it was you posted. I don't aim at personalities. What I target is the subject matter at hand.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^^ this comment has no value, there's no attempt at a correction, no attempt to prove Asians have recent African admixture. it's a bluff, empty
Posts: 42938 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Listen up guys…this is my last attempt to drive the point home. I know some are slower than others. You know the saying “you can take the horse….”. Maybe when Dienkess plagiarize what I post here you will get it.
Anyhow, I was puzzled by why Henn et al chose Qatar to represent Near Eastern population. Why not Turkey or Syria etc. Why Qatar? Now I know why. The recent DNATribes data gives us the answer. Qatari has one of the highest percentage of African ancestry(Sahara,SSA,NE Africa) than most nations in the region.
They essentially chose a Near East population with large African ancestry to represent the NE(Arab) carefully avoiding the other so-called Arab populations like Syria, Iraqi and Lebanese knowing fully well their motive. These are genetically dis-similar to Berbers per new DNATribes study.
So it is a very simple con. If they chose a country like Syria their premise would proved negative. Man, these people are -artist …tricksters. They have no scientific morals. What they do is revolting and unconscionable.
The problem is, many here cannot distinguish between speculation vs facts from these studies. Maybe should get back to debating through picture-spamming.
My point of view will be posted by Dienkess very soon. Stay tuned
.
From :
Genomic Ancestry of North Africans Supports Back-to-Africa Migrations
Brenna M. Henn1.
Materials and Methods
Samples and Data Generation ‘’’ and 20 Qatari from the Arabian Peninsula [44] as Near Eastern representatives.””
Abstract : The INDIGENOUS North African ancestry is more frequent in populations with historical Berber ethnicity. In most North African populations we also see SUBSTANTIAL *****SHARED *****ANCESTRY with the Near East(QATAR), and to a lesser extent sub-Saharan Africa and Europe. ….
Introduction
….Analyses based on the frequencies of a small number of autosomal genetic polymorphisms and uniparental markers have shown that the genetic landscape follow an east-west pattern with little to NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BERBER- AND ARAB-SPEAKING POPULATIONS [6,7]. ….
AUTHOR SUMMARY
The INDIGENOUS North African ANCESTRY may have been MORE COMMON IN BERBER populations and appears most closely RELATED TO POPULATIONS OUTSIDE OF AFRICA, ………
Discussion:
We can REJECT a simple model of LONG-TERM CONTINUOUS GENE FLOW between the Near East and North Africa, as evidenced by clear geographic structure and non-zero Fst estimates. ie If it happened it happened 50,000ya.
Finally, we also OBSERVE EUROPEAN ANCESTRY THAT IS NOT CLEARLY ACCOUNTED for by the inclusion of a Near Eastern sample. Additional migration coming from Europe might be plausible, though the ORIGIN AND THE PERIOD WHERE IT TOOK PLACE CANNOT BE DETERMINED WITH THE PRESENT DATA. The less than 25% European ancestry in populations like ALGERIANS AND NORTHERN MOROCCANS could TRACE BACK TO MARITIME MIGRATIONS throughout the Mediterranean [34]. Alternatively, the QATARI COULD REPRESENT A POOR PROXY FOR AN ARABIC SOURCE population, causing additional diversity to be assigned European (e.g. EUROPEAN ANCESTRY TRACTS WERE NOT RELIABLY ASSIGNED AS EUROPEAN with PCADMIX)
BTW – Per DNATribes – the 3 population that has the highest percentage of European SNPs are Algerians, Northern Moroccans and Tunisians. This aligns with Henn Data.
Also, See Fig 3 – Why Tuscans why not German? The selection of populations for this study is laughable. They chose an admixed European population to represent “Europeans” and still the divergence time is >30,000yo. If they chose Germans it may be 75,000yo!!!!
-------------------- 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 |
BTW – Per DNATribes – the 3 population that has the highest percentage of European SNPs are Algerians, Northern Moroccans and Tunisians. This aligns with Henn Data.
quote:Originally posted by xyyman:
Here we have a people(Tunisians) who may look "Caucasian", LOL!, the men carry African E1b1b*, the women carry a high frequency of supposedly European H1 and other H-sub-clade, (note the majority carry typical U6). They carry autosomal STR that would classify them as negroes per CODIS. As the English would say "what a pickle?"
^^^^oops, played yourself
Posts: 42938 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Xyyman: They carry autosomal STR that would classify them as negroes per CODIS.
You must've had an oxygen shortage in your neurones when when you perceived that to be what some researcher said.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ha! Ha! Ha! played myself. Ignorance is bliss
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by xyyman:
BTW – Per DNATribes – the 3 population that has the highest percentage of European SNPs are Algerians, Northern Moroccans and Tunisians. This aligns with Henn Data.
quote:Originally posted by xyyman:
Here we have a people(Tunisians) who may look "Caucasian", LOL!, the men carry African E1b1b*, the women carry a high frequency of supposedly European H1 and other H-sub-clade, (note the majority carry typical U6). They carry autosomal STR that would classify them as negroes per CODIS. As the English would say "what a pickle?"
^^^^oops, played yourself
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
Genetic structure of north-west Africa revealed by STR analysis
Calafell1, Comas1,
We have analysed a large set of autosomal short tandem repeat (STR) loci in several Arabic and Berber-speaking groups from north-west Africa (ie Moroccan Arabs, northern-central and southern Moroccan Berbers, Saharawis, and Mozabites).
Two levels of analysis have been devised using two sets of STR loci
2) (the former set(CODIS) plus D9S926, D11S2010, D13S767, D14S306, D18S848, D2S1328, D4S243, F13A1, and FES/FPS).
=======================================
The result - : Berbers are Negros ie similar to African American – illustrated below.. Notice the distance between closest Berber and EuroAmericans is 77+74+59+72+61= 343. While the distance between the farthest Berber and African American is ONLY= 33.
There is no race. It is beyond skin color. Pigmentation, nose and hair texture are irrelevant.
Again this agrees with DNATribe’s new study. Notice African Part 4 has the Saharawi the most distant from Europeans at 0.0% compared to other Berbers. According to Calafell et al the So Moroccans and Saharawi have the least amount of European STR.(373+55+36)=434 Thus they are the most distant. This is in line with DNATribes.
That DNATribes Study is on point.
You know what, maybe I am speaking to the wrong crowd.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Originally posted by Xyyman: They carry autosomal STR that would classify them as negroes per CODIS.
You must've had an oxygen shortage in your neurones when when you perceived that to be what some researcher said.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
This study is old, and was among the articles that led me to conclude historic slave trade excuse was bogus. Anyway, like I said, you must've had an oxygen shortage in your neurones when you perceived that to be what some researcher said:
quote:Originally posted by Xyyman: NW Africans were genetically closer to Iberians and to other Europeans than to African Americans.
--Calafell et al
Genetic structure of north-west Africa revealed by STR analysis
quote:Originally posted by Xyyman: The result - : Berbers are Negros ie similar to African American – illustrated below.. Notice the distance between closest Berber and EuroAmericans is 77+74+59+72+61= 343. While the distance between the farthest Berber and African American is ONLY= 33.
^This is how epically retarded you are. You see a couple of values along that tree and you just assume that they're genetic distance values?
quote:Originally posted by Xyyman: The result - :
The result is that the position of the African American sample is the least likely to occur the way it is shown there.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
You could find similar Coonian-type racial stereotyping in Sforza yet he is always referenced here.
Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
All of a sudden some people are against trees and distances. They use to spam the same shyt day in day out claiming European racial "hybrids", fundamental units and what not. lol
Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote: It should be noted that the most robust branch (*****77%******) in the tree is that SEPERATING NW Africans from Europeans.
Thanks for pointing that out yourself, and debunking yourself, you halfwitted nutcase. This is consistent with everything I've said in this, and other threads.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
BTW – Per DNATribes – the 3 population that has the highest percentage of European SNPs are Algerians, Northern Moroccans and Tunisians. This aligns with Henn Data.
quote:Originally posted by xyyman:
Prove to me Berbers are not Negros
prove to me Europeans aren't Negroes
Posts: 42938 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here's an abstract to a genetic study xyyman may like :
quote: Ancient local evolution of African mtDNA haplogroups in Tunisian Berber populations.
Frigi S, Cherni L, Fadhlaoui-Zid K, Benammar-Elgaaied A. Source
Laboratory of Molecular Genetics, Immunology, and Human Pathology, Faculty of Sciences of Tunis, University El Manar, 2092 Tunis, Tunisia. Abstract
Our objective is to highlight the age of sub-Saharan gene flows in North Africa and particularly in Tunisia. Therefore we analyzed in a broad phylogeographic context sub-Saharan mtDNA haplogroups of Tunisian Berber populations considered representative of ancient settlement. More than 2,000 sequences were collected from the literature, and networks were constructed. The results show that the most ancient haplogroup is L3*, which would have been introduced to North Africa from eastern sub-Saharan populations around 20,000 years ago. Our results also point to a less ancient western sub-Saharan gene flow to Tunisia, including haplogroups L2a and L3b. This conclusion points to an ancient African gene flow to Tunisia before 20,000 BP. These findings parallel the more recent findings of both archaeology and linguistics on the prehistory of Africa. The present work suggests that sub-Saharan contributions to North Africa have experienced several complex population processes after the occupation of the region by anatomically modern humans. Our results reveal that Berber speakers have a foundational biogeographic root in Africa and that deep African lineages have continued to evolve in supra-Saharan Africa.
Do I have to summarize? This conclusion points to an ancient African genes flow to Tunisia (a very coastal North African country) before 20,000 BP.
That ancient African genes flow to Tunisia was later diluted by many invasions, conquests, and migrations by Phoenicians, Romans, Vandals, Byzantines, Arabs, Bedouins, Spanish, modern Africans, Turks, French, etc.
Notice how they used samples from Berber in Tunisia, Egypt and East African people to draw their conclusion. All samples simply ignored by Henn. You can't do that when you do a population structure study.
As I said in the other thread: That's the reason it's very important to take samples from African (and Berber) people in North Africa in any genetic studies when we want to know about ancient populations. That is it's very important to take samples from every ethnic groups in a region. Even if they now form a minority (or not) due to foreign invasions, migration and admixture. If that Frigi study (the abstract posted above) didn't took samples from those Berber groups in Tunisia, like the Henn did, we wouldn't know that new corroborating information about the African presence in North Africa dating back to 20,000 BP and it's linkage to the eastern Sahara/Sudanic/East Africa region (aka the Saharan-Sahel-Nile Belt).
If we ignore ancient ethnic minority (or not) as done by the Henn study, Native Americans would be left out of history!!!
Same as some people (*cough* Henn *cough*) want to left out ancient black Africans from the North African history!!
Here's again the very restricted samples set used by Henn:
Table S1: Details of the dataset used in the present study.
Population Sample Size Country Reference Morocco - North 18 Morocco Present study Morocco - South 16 Morocco Present study Saharawi 18 Western Sahara Present study Algerian 19 Algeria Present study Tunisian 18 Tunisia Present study Libyan 17 Libya Present study Egyptian 19 Egypt Present study Basques 20 Spain Present study Tuscans 26 Italy HapMap3 Qatari 30 Qatar Hunter-Zinck et al. 2010 Yoruba 26 Nigeria HapMap3 Hausa 12 Nigeria Bryc et al. 2010 Bulala 15 Nigeria Bryc et al. 2010 Fulani 12 Nigeria Bryc et al. 2010 Luhya 25 Kenya HapMap3 Maasai 30 Kenya HapMap3
Completely absurd for a population structure study.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
Same as some people (*cough* Henn *cough*) want to left out ancient black Africans from the North African history!!
Here's again the very restricted samples set used by Henn:
Table S1: Details of the dataset used in the present study.
Population Sample Size Country Reference Morocco - North 18 Morocco Present study Morocco - South 16 Morocco Present study Saharawi 18 Western Sahara Present study Algerian 19 Algeria Present study Tunisian 18 Tunisia Present study Libyan 17 Libya Present study Egyptian 19 Egypt Present study Basques 20 Spain Present study Tuscans 26 Italy HapMap3 Qatari 30 Qatar Hunter-Zinck et al. 2010 Yoruba 26 Nigeria HapMap3 Hausa 12 Nigeria Bryc et al. 2010 Bulala 15 Nigeria Bryc et al. 2010 Fulani 12 Nigeria Bryc et al. 2010 Luhya 25 Kenya HapMap3 Maasai 30 Kenya HapMap3
Completely absurd for a population structure study.
If we ignore ancient ethnic minority (or not) as done by the Henn study, Native Americans would be left out of history!!!
[/QB]
That is an improper analogy and we are talking about genetics not history. History = what is written or orally transmitted. If you see some rock art with no writing it's prehsitoric.
But that's not my main point:
If you average the entire population of the U.S. the percentage of Native Americans are less than 2%.
They are noted in genetic analysis of the U.S. as a whole.
Your analogy is improper because in the case of North Africa you would insist the every single tribe is sampled otherwised it's "flawed" So if you want to apply that to Native Americans that's like insisting every Native tribe be sampled even if there might be only 20 living members left as an example.
Ok fine, suppose every Native American tribe was sampled -gues what now you wnat a chart with over 500 tribes! -but that still does not change the fact that in modern America Native Americans still comprise less than 2% of the U.S. population and will occupy the same small sliver on a pie chart. Increasing the number of tribes recorded does not increase the percentage of Native Americans to non-Native Americans in the U.S. as a whole.
Likewise with Maghreb populations. Youw oulds say unless hundreds of tribes are not all recorded on some chart the population study is flawed. It's not flawed for that reason just because supre fine detail is not included
And the Henn article is talking about Maghreb popultions not Sahel populations.
Posts: 42938 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
And the Henn article is talking about Maghreb popultions not Sahel populations.
When you ignore part of the population in such population structure study, it leads to erroneous conclusion.
For example, Henn doesn't see any African DNA in Ancient time!! He concludes there's no such thing in North Africa. He only sees recent African DNA in North Africa. He attribute all non recent middle eastern DNA mutations to some "native" DNA from some ancient West Asian back migration (but isolated from the rest of west Asia for many years, which he calls "likely autochthonous Maghrebi ancestry"). We know better. While the Frigi study shows us that there was indeed Ancient black African presence in North Africa. Which may be part of the genome of modern coastal North Africans and even explain part of the DNA erroneously attributed to some ancient autochthonous Maghrebi DNA!
For example, if we don't take samples of native americans and look at the samples of South American people (mix of European, African and Natives). We could attribute the ancient Native American DNA in those people to some ancient European migration (like the Maghrebi above). That is DNA mutations that can't be seen in Europe or anywhere else in the world. But in reality, they can be seen some place else in the world. They can be seen in Native Americans.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lioness doesn't think your analogy with North American Indians is applicable because to him there's no such thing as ancient black Africans in North Africa, the place was a melting pot from the start. He thinks this of AE too.
Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
And the Henn article is talking about Maghreb popultions not Sahel populations.
When you ignore part of the population in such population structure study, it leads to erroneous conclusion.
For example, Henn doesn't see any African DNA in Ancient time!! He concludes there's no such thing in North Africa. He only sees recent African DNA in North Africa. He attribute all non recent middle eastern DNA mutations to some "native" DNA from some ancient West Asian back migration (but isolated from the rest of west Asia for many years, which he calls "likely autochthonous Maghrebi ancestry"). We know better. While the Frigi study shows us that there was indeed Ancient black African presence in North Africa. Which may be part of the genome of modern coastal North Africans and even explain part of the DNA erroneously attributed to some ancient autochthonous Maghrebi DNA!
Barbara Henn et. al are not talking about the whole history of North Africa. They are talking about the ancestral backgrounds of the current population. the primary components not every tiny trace detail The theme of the study is back-to-Africa migrations not every aspect of Magreb history from the start.
You mention, I think, Frigi article on Tunisians, I haven't read it deeply enough to judge, will have to get back to it later. I can't remember if I even posted it at some earlier time. I will post it now in a separate thread. Skimming it now it possibly supports your position, I'll have to look at again later
Posts: 42938 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
I fail to see how your and Tukuler's conclusion contradicts anything I said. Again for the third time, I never denied African influence from the Maghreb spreading into Mediterranean Europe prior to the expansion of peoples from the Eastern Mediterranean specifically Asia. However, the conclusion of the paper is a far cry from what I believe you are proposing and which is that Nuragic culture is solely a product of Africa.![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
An old study but you came to a conclusion from it...You are a BSer Sweetness 
Printer-friendly view of this topic