...
EgyptSearch Forums Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» EgyptSearch Forums » Egyptology » Nubian aDNA: what the hell is stopping ES members from claiming CL Fox 1997? (Page 6)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 6 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6   
Author Topic: Nubian aDNA: what the hell is stopping ES members from claiming CL Fox 1997?
Djehuti
Member
Member # 6698

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Djehuti     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

^^^Don't be ridiculous. I'm not here to answer all you're stupid questions.

You're the one who must prove that E is NOT younger than the OOA migrations? And that E was part of the OOA migrations? Or that East and West Africans don't share the E-P2 haplogroup. Which you can't. OOA migrants were from the upstream CT haplogroup. Most East and West Africans from the downstream E haplogroups (over 80% of their populations).

 -

All this is discussed in more depth here:

Common Origin of black Africans, Ancient Egyptians and Kushites people
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=009076

Hey guys doesn't Amanut's own graph refute him?? According to the graph CF carriers were in Eurasia before E-M96 (E*) even diverged, and the same is true with DE.

Anyway, the nutcase is too stupid to realize that we are not racists trying to white-wash or de-Africanize people who are obviously African BUT there is no arguing that some Africans are closer related to Eurasians than to other Africans.

As I tried explaining to the idiot even PN2 derived E carrying Africans in general are closer related to Eurasians than they are to say Africans who carry or A. Again, his OWN graphs shows this.

This is why racial typology is scientifically invalid and bankrupt, and why people who rely on such typology for their racial agendas will always fail!

Posts: 23494 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
And then the emotional crybaby said:

"It's obvious you're trying to waste my time by
making me answer stupid questions".

He genuinely thinks they are a bunch of random questions
that I pulled out of thin air to torment him and waste his
time. Not the first time I've seen this "they're out to get
me" paranoia on ES. How profoundly oblivious can you
be to not see the relationship and direct relevancy of
the questions to the matter at hand? Like the goldfish
in the fishtank who never realizes he's engulfed in water,
because he doesn't have the capacity to compute such
a notion.

Posts: 7497 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova
Member
Member # 15718

Icon 1 posted      Profile for zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
Certainly not. Those people (Kikuyu, Hutu, Oromo, East Africans) are obviously African and they share a common origin with most other Africans like West Africans and Bantu at a time period after the OOA migrations. Your question doesn't even make sense. Are Kikuyu not Africans? Why do you say "than Africans", which they are themselves?

I asked the question because Beyoku up above says that quote:

" does not exempt the fact that East Africans are closer to Eurasian populations.
All one need to do is look at an East African population that we assume is not "Mixed"."



So based on your statement above, is Beyoku wrong? Are Kikuyu, Oromo,
Hutu etc, who are all East Africans, closer to Eurasians than other
African populations? If not, where are the errors in Beyoku's claim?

Posts: 5107 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Djehuti
Member
Member # 6698

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Djehuti     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally edited by Djehuti:

quote:
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

^^^Don't be ridiculous. I'm not here to answer all you're stupid questions.

You're the one who must prove that E is NOT younger than the OOA migrations? And that E was part of the OOA migrations? Or that East and West Africans don't share the E-P2 haplogroup. Which you can't. OOA migrants were from the upstream CT haplogroup. Most East and West Africans from the downstream E haplogroups (over 80% of their populations).

 -

All this is discussed in more depth here:

Common Origin of black Africans, Ancient Egyptians and Kushites people
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=009076

Hey guys doesn't Amanut's own graph refute him?? According to the graph CF carriers were in Eurasia before E-M96 (E*) even diverged, and the same is true with DE.

Anyway, the nutcase is too stupid to realize that we are not racists trying to white-wash or de-Africanize people who are obviously African BUT there is no arguing that some Africans are closer related to Eurasians than to other Africans.

As I tried explaining to the idiot even PN2 derived E carrying Africans in general are closer related to Eurasians than they are to say Africans who carry B or A. Again, his OWN graphs shows this.

This is why racial typology is scientifically invalid and bankrupt, and why people who rely on such typology for their racial agendas will always fail!


Posts: 23494 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally edited by Djehuti:
Hey guys doesn't Amanut's own graph refute him??
According to the graph CF carriers were in Eurasia
before E-M96 (E*) even diverged, and the same is
true with DE.

Initially I didn't see the significance of what you
were saying, but yeah, very sharp point; the map is
not internally consistent in that regard. I don't
think it was meant to be taken that seriously (its
simplified and watered down) but he obviously thinks
it's the bible of population genetics judging by
how often he posts it along with the rest of his
propaganda.

Posts: 7497 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
beyoku
Member
Member # 14524

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for beyoku     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
quote:
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
Certainly not. Those people (Kikuyu, Hutu, Oromo, East Africans) are obviously African and they share a common origin with most other Africans like West Africans and Bantu at a time period after the OOA migrations. Your question doesn't even make sense. Are Kikuyu not Africans? Why do you say "than Africans", which they are themselves?

I asked the question because Beyoku up above says that quote:

" does not exempt the fact that East Africans are closer to Eurasian populations.
All one need to do is look at an East African population that we assume is not "Mixed"."



So based on your statement above, is Beyoku wrong? Are Kikuyu, Oromo,
Hutu etc, who are all East Africans, closer to Eurasians than other
African populations? If not, where are the errors in Beyoku's claim?

He will do one of two things.
1 - Not answer.
2 - Run away for a while only to come back and spew the same nonsense.

Its funny I am the so called wacists when he sounds very simililar to the Euroclown playbook seen HERE.

Everything he is saying is thoroughly debunked because he doesn't actually READ the data.
http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2014/10/08/008805.full.pdf

He says that Khoi/Twa didn mix with other E/L3/M168 folks:

DEBUNKED
quote:
Other studies (PRÜFER ET AL 2014, MEYER ET AL 2012,
TISHKOFF ET AL 2009) have shown that, while the San and Mbuti are the most diverged
from all other populations sampled, the Mandenka and Yoruba populations have only
recently separated and the Dinka population shares some ancestry with non-African
populations. The San and Mbuti projections onto YRI show a slight excess of rare alleles,
suggesting some admixture from their ancestors into the ancestors of YRI

Note the above about the Dinka..........they "shares some ancestry with non-African
populations." According to Amun Ra the troll that should not be the case since they are mostly A/B non L3 population. And remember :

quote:
These results mean that we have not identified any sub-Saharan African sample that we are confident has no evidence of back-to-Africa migration. Our best candidate at present is the Dinka but it is possible that with a phased genome or large sample sizes we would detect evidence of non-African ancestry in this population as well.
 -

Dinka sit closest to Eurasians.....have less Neanderthal and Yoruba.....they are Primarily an A/B population........they share "some ancestry with non-African populations." yet they are the "best candidate at present" for a "sub-Saharan African sample that we are confident has no evidence of back-to-Africa migration"

Anyone looking for the context of the quote can simply GOOGLE IT.

Posts: 2081 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Like casting pearls before swines, tho.
Posts: 7497 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
beyoku
Member
Member # 14524

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for beyoku     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
Like casting pearls before swines, tho.

Sadly.....this is why I haven't posted that new paper.
Posts: 2081 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Amun-Ra The Ultimate
Member
Member # 20039

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Amun-Ra The Ultimate     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by beyoku:
 -

That's not a problem to me and doesn't contradict me in any way because Dinka in that graph (which is NOT about genetic distance btw) are still closer to Yoruba than they are to any of the Eurasian samples in the graph.

As I said before, multiple times, of course if you divide a Yoruba town into 2 groups in a competely random fashion, due to random genetic drift (etc) one of the 2 group will be closer to Eurasian than the other group. But they will still be closer to one another than they are to Eurasians. Even with 2 twins individuals, as a bit of a trivia, there will one closer to Eurasian populations than the other one (because it turns out twins are not genetically *exactly* similar although they are almost similar). Low level bi-directional admixtures through intermediary can also have some impact.

Dinka in your graph, which is not about genetic distance, are still closer to Yoruba than they are to any Eurasian populations.

For Ancient Egyptian it's the same thing, according to current genetic results they are closer to sub-Saharan Africans (E1b1a, Great Lakes Africans, Southern Africans, West Africans, archaeological continuity, etc) than they are to Eurasians, North Africans or West Asians populations.


See more about it here:
BMJ study (Ramses III=E1b1a):
http://www.bmj.com/content/345/bmj.e8268

DNA Tribes autosomal analysis (Mummies aDNA more prevalent in modern Great Lakes, Southern and Western African populations):
http://www.dnatribes.com/dnatribes-digest-2012-01-01.pdf
http://www.dnatribes.com/dnatribes-digest-2013-02-01.pdf

So, Ancient Egyptians are closer to sub-Saharan Africans (E1b1a, Great Lakes, etc) than they are to Europeans or West Asians populations despite having some low level Eurasian admixtures like during the Hyksos (Aamu/Asians) occupation and probably even during the foundation of Ancient Egypt (since neighboring populations -including with Eurasian nomadic tribes- always intermarry/intermix at low level). Despite this low level admixtures with Eurasians Ancient Egyptians still end up to be closer to Sub-Saharan Africans than Eurasians according to current genetic and archaeological study results.

Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
beyoku
Member
Member # 14524

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for beyoku     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You are moving the goal post. Notice issue stated by myself and which was also asked by Zarahan was this :

quote:
I asked the question because Beyoku up above says that quote:

"does not exempt the fact that East Africans are closer to Eurasian populations.
All one need to do is look at an East African population that we assume is not "Mixed"."

You didnt answer the question. That you point out that the Dinka are close to the Yoruba is a valid point. That does not exempt the fact that the Dinka are closer to the Eurasian sample than the Yoruba and Twa are! In turn the Yoruba are closer to the Eurasians than that Twa are.

This tree only includes 3 African populations. Include the Khoi, Southern Bantu, Dongon, Mandinka, Fulani, Kenyans Omotics, Somali, Sudanese etc and the cline with be even longer. The Cline will be long enough that SOME Africans..................could be closer to Eurasians than any other Africans.

This would be even more pronounced if you travel back through time to OOA because the Africans that left....wouldn't be fully genetically differentiated from the Africans that didnt leave.

quote:
http://i58.tinypic.com/1o0gw8.png
PLease answer Zarahan's question. In fact please explain the position of the Dinka....having less Neanderthal than the Yoruba, having shared ancestry with Eurasians while at the same time being the best proxy from an African population with NO Admixture compared to the Yoruba.
And also being heavy in A/B non L3. You cant.

Posts: 2081 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
.Charlie Bass.
Member
Member # 10328

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for .Charlie Bass.     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
mtDNA analysis in ancient Nubians supports the existence of gene flow between sub-Sahara and North Africa in the Nile valley
quote:
The Hpal (np3,592) mitochondrial DNA marker is a selectively neutral mutation that is very common in sub-Saharan Africa and is almost absent in North African and European populations. It has been screened in a Meroitic sample from ancient Nubia through PCR amplification and posterior enzyme digestion, to evaluate the sub-Saharan genetic influences in this population. From 29 individuals analysed, only 15 yield positive amplifications, four of them (26.7%) displaying the sub-Saharan African marker. Hpa 1 (np3,592) marker is present in the sub-Saharan populations at a frequency of 68.7 on average. Thus, the frequency of genes from this area in the Merotic Nubian population can be estimated at around 39% (with a confidence interval from 22% to 55%). The frequency obtained fits in a south-north decreasing gradient of Hpa I (np3,592) along the African continent. Results suggest that morphological changes observed historically in the Nubian populations are more likely to be due to the existence of south-north gene flow through the Nile Valley than to in-situ evolution.
I can't wrap my mind around why this paper is so undercited, aside from Cuckoo Mathilda and her confused puppets. Notice I'm not saying that this paper has been ignored by ES members, as its potential to be misconstrued has been nipped in the bud several times. But why isn't it pro-actively quoted as much as, say, DNA Tribes' Amarna analysis?

First of all, judging by the abstract, the authors aren't even saying that these Nubians had 61% non-African mtDNAs, and secondly, their title and abstract are suggesting that they were testing the contributions of Niger Congo speaking Africans in the ancient Nile Valley genepool (which doesn't make sense due to the fact that these lineages predate anything Niger-Congo, but oh well..):

Thus, the frequency of genes from this area in the Merotic Nubian population can be estimated at around 39%

^They clearly aren't counting Northeast African specific mtDNA Ls (which we now know, are prominent).

Thirdly, it is NORMAL for Sudanese to only have ~30% hpa I np 3592 associated uniparentals (L1 and L2):

quote:
For mtDNA analysis, a total of 56 haplotypes were observed, all belonging to the major sub-Saharan African and Eurasian mitochondrial macrohapolgroups L0, L1, L2, L4, L5, L3A, M and N in frequencies of 12.1, 11.9, 22, 4.2, 6.2, 29.5, 2, and 12.2% respectively.
--Hassan, 2009

Forget all that nonense arguing with Amun, now back to the topic. By the logic of this study, if my mtDNA was among the samples, I would be counted as NOT being sub-Saharan because my mtDNA haplogroup is L4b2, which is found scattered around the continent but at very low frequencies and highest in Hazda. The reason this study cannot be cited is because it is dated, didn't specific whether the non- Hpa 1 (np3,592) markers are L0 and or L3-L7. perhaps if her samples were tested again we could have a much more accurate presentation. Back then I remember debating Racial Reality aka "Racial Myths" who used this study, well the abstract, to say ancient Nubians were 39% "Negroid" and therefore not black. Hpa 1 (np3,592) is typical of only L1 and L2, but we know L3-L7 and M1 is found at higher frequencies in Northeast Africa. Also in teh fulltext of the study, CL Fox presumed that the Nubian population was originally a "Caucasoid" population that became more Negroid, another reason why this study should not be cited.

Swenet step your game up brother, I know you can do better than this, smh

Posts: 2382 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
.Charlie Bass.
Member
Member # 10328

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for .Charlie Bass.     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
bump
Posts: 2382 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
beyoku
Member
Member # 14524

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for beyoku     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I find it strange you cant tell he knows the details of Hpal 3592 just by looking at the very first post in the thread.....Or the other images comparing the Ancient Nubian dna with contemporary African lineages.

Or maybe my sarcasm meter is turned off?

Posts: 2081 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Amun-Ra The Ultimate
Member
Member # 20039

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Amun-Ra The Ultimate     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by beyoku:
PLease answer Zarahan's question. In fact please explain the position of the Dinka....having less Neanderthal than the Yoruba, having shared ancestry with Eurasians while at the same time being the best proxy from an African population with NO Admixture compared to the Yoruba.
And also being heavy in A/B non L3. You cant.

You're lying to us again. Like I caught you here (it was not the first time there either):
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=008387;p=4#000151

Dinka have (bi-directional) post-OOA migration admixtures with Eurasians (through e1b1b intermediaries) and they also have L3 in large proportion.

Dinka haplogroups frequencies can be seen here in the Hirbo study:
http://drum.lib.umd.edu/handle/1903/11443

If we look at the study above we can gather those numbers:
Dinka L3:33.33% (3.03+3.03+3.03+24.24)
Dinka Eurasian mtdNA:6.05% (100-3.03+6.06+15.15+12.12+ 3.03+3.03+3.03+24.24+6.06+18.2)
Dinka: E1b1b (M78):15.38%


So Dinka have L3 in large quantity 33.33%
They got 6.05% of patrilocal (female mediated) admixtures with Eurasian.
They got 15.38% of E1b1b.
We know some Eurasian populations got E1b1b in small proportion (larger for the Balkans).

All this have impact on the genetic distance (even if we had a real genetic distance value). They show post-OOA bi-directional admixtures between Dinka and Eurasians probably through intermediaries (E1b1b carrier).

Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
@Charlie

I agree with what you're saying. When I wrote that, I
was arguing from the perspective that C.L. Fox was
talking about external influences on already indigenous
Nile Valley populations:

to evaluate the sub-Saharan genetic influences in
this population


Now, a couple of years later, I no longer think that's
what she was doing. However, I do think the results
can be repurposed for the case that this sample was
predominantly African. The reason is because, if
you're arguing from C.L. Fox' perspective that the
Nubian population was originally Caucasoid, you need
a lot of African geneflow to get from 0% to 26.7% HpaI
when you're dealing with Afro-Asiatic mtDNA M1
populations (certainly more than 26.7%). Taking modern
samples with known craniometric overlap with Meroites,
who live near Meroe, you'd need more than 50% mtDNA
L types to go from immigrant non-African to 26.7% HpaI.

Posts: 7497 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Amun-Ra The Ultimate
Member
Member # 20039

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Amun-Ra The Ultimate     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
This is not directly related to my last post above but for info this is the proportion of L3 in Yoruba and Somali (gathered from the same Hirbo Study ):

Yoruba L3 45.45% (12.12+6.06 +21.21+ 6.06)
Somali L3 44.68% (7.41 +3.74+7.47+11.11+3.74+3.74+7.47)

This and the large proportion of CT descendant haplogroups (E and E-P2 haplogroups) among both Yoruba and Somali, show that BOTH Yoruba and Somali share a common origin with OOA migrants (who are all CT and L3 descendants). That's true for most African populations beside Aka-Mbuti related people and Khoisan people (who only got more recent admixtures with Eurasians through intermediaries as well as recent CT and L3 African lineages admixtures).

Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
.Charlie Bass.
Member
Member # 10328

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for .Charlie Bass.     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
@Charlie

I agree with what you're saying. When I wrote that, I
was arguing from the perspective that C.L. Fox was
talking about external influences on indigenous Nile
Valley populations:

to evaluate the sub-Saharan genetic influences in
this population


Now, a couple of years later, I no longer think that's
what she was doing. However, I do think the results
can be repurposed for the case that this sample was
predominantly African. The reason is because, if
you're arguing from C.L. Fox' perspective that the
Nubian population was originally Caucasoid, you need
a lot of African geneflow to get from 0% to 26.7% HpaI
when you're dealing with Afro-Asiatic mtDNA M1
populations (certainly more than 26.7%). Taking modern
samples with known craniometric overlap with Meroites,
you'd need more than 50% mtDNA L types to go from
immigrant non-African to 26.7% HpaI.

Oh ok, all is cool then,, I mean just know that pretty much prior to 2000 all of those sources never defined L3 and all of its sister clades, L4 being one. I tried to get a hold of her study full text so people can see the stuff she wrote in it, very typological for its time.
Posts: 2382 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
This and the large proportion of CT descendant
haplogroups (E and E-P2 haplogroups) among both
Yoruba and Somali, show that BOTH Yoruba and Somali
share a common origin with OOA migrants

All modern humans on the face of the earth share a
common origin with OOA migrants. However, if you're
going to push your lying propaganda that the West
African populations you talk about split after
OOA, I'm going to need some evidence. Where is it?
Every time you duck the question and spout the
same propaganda again, I'm going to be on your
bumper.

Posts: 7497 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Amun-Ra The Ultimate
Member
Member # 20039

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Amun-Ra The Ultimate     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
This and the large proportion of CT descendant
haplogroups (E and E-P2 haplogroups) among both
Yoruba and Somali, show that BOTH Yoruba and Somali
share a common origin with OOA migrants

All modern humans on the face of the earth share a
common origin with OOA migrants. However, if you're
going to push your lying propaganda that the West
African populations you talk about split after
OOA, I'm going to need some evidence. Where is it?
Every time you duck the question and spout the
same propaganda again, I'm going to be on your
bumper.

Since E-P2, the Y-DNA haplogroup shared between East and West African is downstream to CT, it's obvious it happened after the OOA migrations of CT carriers (the Y-DNA haplogroup of all OOA migrants). East and West Africans share a common father (E-P2) and various mothers (L2a, L3bf, L3cd, L3eikx, L0a, etc). While both East and West Africans share great great grandfathers and grandmothers with Eurasians. People who share downstream E-P2 between each others are more closely related to each others than people that share only upstream (more ancient) CT haplogroup. It's basic logic.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
mtDNA analysis in ancient Nubians supports the existence of gene flow between sub-Sahara and North Africa in the Nile valley
quote:
The Hpal (np3,592) mitochondrial DNA marker is a selectively neutral mutation that is very common in sub-Saharan Africa and is almost absent in North African and European populations. It has been screened in a Meroitic sample from ancient Nubia through PCR amplification and posterior enzyme digestion, to evaluate the sub-Saharan genetic influences in this population. From 29 individuals analysed, only 15 yield positive amplifications, four of them (26.7%) displaying the sub-Saharan African marker. Hpa 1 (np3,592) marker is present in the sub-Saharan populations at a frequency of 68.7 on average. Thus, the frequency of genes from this area in the Merotic Nubian population can be estimated at around 39% (with a confidence interval from 22% to 55%). The frequency obtained fits in a south-north decreasing gradient of Hpa I (np3,592) along the African continent. Results suggest that morphological changes observed historically in the Nubian populations are more likely to be due to the existence of south-north gene flow through the Nile Valley than to in-situ evolution.
I can't wrap my mind around why this paper is so undercited, aside from Cuckoo Mathilda and her confused puppets. Notice I'm not saying that this paper has been ignored by ES members, as its potential to be misconstrued has been nipped in the bud several times. But why isn't it pro-actively quoted as much as, say, DNA Tribes' Amarna analysis?

First of all, judging by the abstract, the authors aren't even saying that these Nubians had 61% non-African mtDNAs, and secondly, their title and abstract are suggesting that they were testing the contributions of Niger Congo speaking Africans in the ancient Nile Valley genepool (which doesn't make sense due to the fact that these lineages predate anything Niger-Congo, but oh well..):

Thus, the frequency of genes from this area in the Merotic Nubian population can be estimated at around 39%

^They clearly aren't counting Northeast African specific mtDNA Ls (which we now know, are prominent).

Thirdly, it is NORMAL for Sudanese to only have ~30% hpa I np 3592 associated uniparentals (L1 and L2):

quote:
For mtDNA analysis, a total of 56 haplotypes were observed, all belonging to the major sub-Saharan African and Eurasian mitochondrial macrohapolgroups L0, L1, L2, L4, L5, L3A, M and N in frequencies of 12.1, 11.9, 22, 4.2, 6.2, 29.5, 2, and 12.2% respectively.
--Hassan, 2009
For the record, certain aspects of this post are
inaccurate. The Hpal 3592 marker left the mtDNA
tree immediately upstream of L4'3, meaning, only
L3, L4, M and N lineages lack the Hpal 3592 marker.

There are exceptions but these exceptions don't
have common ancestry with the Hpal 3592 marker
upstream of L4'3.

Repost. Only L3 and L4 are HpaI negative. L5 and
L6 are not HpaI negative. L7 has been tucked in
with L4 in current phylogeny.

Posts: 7497 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
This and the large proportion of CT descendant
haplogroups (E and E-P2 haplogroups) among both
Yoruba and Somali, show that BOTH Yoruba and Somali
share a common origin with OOA migrants

All modern humans on the face of the earth share a
common origin with OOA migrants. However, if you're
going to push your lying propaganda that the West
African populations you talk about split after
OOA, I'm going to need some evidence. Where is it?
Every time you duck the question and spout the
same propaganda again, I'm going to be on your
bumper. [/qb]

Since E-P2, the Y-DNA haplogroup shared between East and West African is downstream to CT, it's obvious it happened after the OOA migrations of CT carriers (the Y-DNA haplogroup of all OOA migrants). East and West Africans share a common father (E-P2) and various mothers (L2a, L3bf, L3cd, L3eikx, L0a, etc). While both East and West Africans share great great grandfathers and grandmothers with Eurasians. People who share downstream E-P2 between each others are more closely related to each others than people that share only upstream (more ancient) CT haplogroup. It's basic logic.
Every inference you make here on the basis of hg
sharing between the implicated East and West Africans
is absolute gibberish. These instances of hg sharing
can be explained in more ways than a split after
OOA; there is nothing "obvious" about what you're
flapping your gums about.

Where is your evidence? No one cares about what
YOU wrote or what YOU deem evident. Just a month
ago you said that Y chromsomes lineages can be
inferred from the autosomes. All your "evidence" so
far has been your own monologue. When will it
dawn on you that the myths you cook up in your
spare time are no substitutes for evidence?

Posts: 7497 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Amun-Ra The Ultimate
Member
Member # 20039

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Amun-Ra The Ultimate     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
^^You're a racist idiot.

People who share downstream E-P2 between each others are more closely related to each others than people that share only upstream (more ancient) CT haplogroup. It's basic logic. Only bigotry make you deny what is evident for everybody else.

Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Rate Member
Icon 10 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The sharing of substantial L3 and E-P2 subclades
between two separated populations tells you about
post-split admixture, not the first population split
itself that defines when their ancestral populations
first went their separate ways, incompetent fraud.
Now, do you have any evidence for the figments of
your imagination, or what?

Posts: 7497 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Amun-Ra The Ultimate
Member
Member # 20039

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Amun-Ra The Ultimate     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
The sharing of substantial L3 and E-P2 subclades
between two separated populations tells you about
post-split admixture, not the first population
split itself, incompetent fraud. Now, do you have
any evidence for the figments of your imagination,
or what?

That's ridiculous. East and West African population share upstream(older) haplogroups between each other not downstream.

For example, Somali got no E1b1a or L3e (common among Yoruba people), but share upstream E-P2 and L3eikx with Yoruba populations (see Hirbo) . So before E-P2 and L3eikx split into local regional variants like E1b1a and L3e.

Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Blablablabla

You can stop with all these confused "see Hirbo"
references. I've already told you that the whole
Hirbo thesis is one big refutation of your claims,
including the ones you try to advance here.
Remember? I think it was about the 30th time you
fled the scene after you realized your propaganda
was exposed.

Confused charlatan, do you know the difference
between an original population split and different
post-split expansions towards of West Africa?

 -

The mere notion of post-split admixture is too much
to compute for you, isn't it? Maybe these pictures
help.

Posts: 7497 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Djehuti
Member
Member # 6698

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Djehuti     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
^ LOL [Big Grin] You're still arguing with the Ultimate Nut??

The guy obviously has issues. So what's the point?

Posts: 23494 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Tukuler
Member
Member # 19944

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Tukuler   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What's the point of your post?

It doesn't tell us anything
about any topic. It's just
an unprovoked gratuitous
personal attack on ARtU
that cheapens the thread
and makes ES Egyptology
look worthless.

--------------------
Intellectual property of YYT al~Takruri © 2004 - 2017. All rights reserved.

Posts: 3774 | From: the Tekrur bordering Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Firewall
Member
Member # 20331

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Firewall     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Bump.
Posts: 2109 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Firewall
Member
Member # 20331

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Firewall     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Firewall:
Modern sudan
Now this is paternal only.




Sample Nubians taken(Nile Valley)
Nubians (Agriculturists; n=39; Nilo-Saharan, Eastern Sudanic)
3/39 = 7.7% B-M60 - Nilotic
3/39 = 7.7% E1b1b-M215(xE1b1b1a-M7.8. North East Africa
5/39 = 12.8% E1b1b1a1-V12(xE1b1b1a1b-V32) North East Africa
1/39 = 2.6% E1b1b1a1b-V32 North East Africa
4/39 = 10.3% F-M89(xH1-M52, I-M170, J-12f2, K-M9) Western Asia
2/39 = 5.1% I-M170 - Near East
16/39 = 41.0% J-12f2(xJ2-M172) - Arabic
1/39 = 2.6% J2-M172 -Arabic
4/39 = 10.3% R1b1-P25 - Chadic


Nuba
Hill Nubians and others.(Central sudan)
(Nilo-Saharan, Eastern Sudanic)
46 % A3b2-M13 - Nilotic
14.2% B-M60 - Nilotic
14.2% E1b1b-M215(xE1b1b1a-M7.8. - North East Africa
25 % E1b1b1a1-V12(xE1b1b1a1b-V32) North East Africa


Beja (Pastoralists; n=42; Afro-Asiatic, Cushitic?)
2/42 = 4.8% A3b2-M13 - Nilotic
7/42 = 16.7% E1b1b-M215(xE1b1b1a-M7.8. - North East Africa
2/42 = 4.8% E1b1b1a1-V12(xE1b1b1a1b-V32) North East Africa
13/42 = 31.0% E1b1b1a1b-V32 -North East Africa
15/42 = 35.7% J-12f2(xJ2-M172) Arabic
1/42 = 2.4% J2-M172 -Arabic
2/42 = 4.8% R1b1-P25 - Chadic


Arabs/Gaalien (Agriculturists; n=50; Afro-Asiatic, Semitic)
3/50 = 6.0% A3b2-M13 - Nilotic
3/50 = 6.0% E1b1b1a1-V12(xE1b1b1a1b-V32) North East Africa
3/50 = 6.0% E1b1b1a1b-V32 North East Africa
3/50 = 6.0% E1b1b1a3-V22 North East Africa
5/50 = 10.0% F-M89(xH1-M52, I-M 170, J-12f2, K-M9)Western Asia
2/50 = 4.0% I-M170 Near East
18/50 = 36.0% J-12f2(xJ2-M172) Arabic
2/50 = 4.0% J2-M172 Arabic
3/50 = 6.0% K-M9(xL-M11, O-M175, P-M74) Southwestern Asia
1/50 = 2.0% R1-M173(xR1b1-P25) Chadic
7/50 = 14.0% R1b1-P25 - Chadic


Arabs/Meseria (Nomadic Pastoralists; n=28; Afro-Asiatic, Semitic)
1/28 = 3.6% E1b1b1a1-V12(xE1b1b1a1b-V32) North East Africa
3/28 = 10.7% E1b1b1a1b-V32 North East Africa
3/28 = 10.7% F-M89(xH1-M52, I-M170, J-12f2, K-M9) Western Asia
2/28 = 7.1% I-M170 - South West Asia
12/28 = 42.9% J-12f2(xJ2-M172) Arabic
7/28 = 25.0% R1b1-P25 - Chadic


Arabs/Arakien (Agriculturists; n=24; Afro-Asiatic, Semitic)
2/24 = 8.3% E1b1b1a1-V12(xE1b1b1a1b-V32) - North East Africa
1/24 = 4.2% E1b1b1a1b-V32 North East Africa
1/24 = 4.2% E1b1b1a3-V22 North East Africa
2/24 = 8.3% F-M89(xH1-M52, I-M170, J-12f2, K-M9) West Asia
16/24 = 66.7% J-12f2(xJ2-M172) Arabic
2/24 = 8.3% R1b1-P25 Chadic

Sudanese Arab total:
3/102 = 2.9% A3b2-M13 - Nilotic
6/102 = 5.9% E1b1b1a1-V12(xE1b1b1a1b-V32) - North East Africa
7/102 = 6.9% E1b1b1a1b-V32 - North East Africa
4/102 = 3.9% E1b1b1a3-V22 - North East Africa
10/102 = 9.8% F-M89(xH1-M52, I-M170, J-12f2, K-M9) West Asia
4/102 = 3.9% I-M170 South West Asia
46/102 = 45.1% J-12f2(xJ2-M172) Arabic
2/102 = 2.0% J2-M172 - Arabic
3/102 = 2.9% K-M9(xL-M11, O-M175, P-M74) - South west Asia
1/102 = 1.0% R1-M173(xR1b1-P25) - Chadic
16/102 = 15.7% R1b1-P25 - Chadic


Masalit (Agriculturists; n=32; Nilo-Saharan, Maban)
6/32 = 18.8% A3b2-M13 - Nilotic
1/32 = 3.1% B-M60 - Nilotic
1/32 = 3.1% E1b1b1a-M78(xE1b1b1a1-V12, E1b1b1a2-V13, E1b1b1a3-V22, E1b1b1a4-V65) - North East Africa
17/32 = 53.1% E1b1b1a1b-V32 - North East Africa
5/32 = 15.6% E1b1b1a3-V22 - North East Africa
2/32 = 6.3% J-12f2(xJ2-M172) Arabic


Fur (Agriculturists; n=32; Nilo-Saharan, Fur)
10/32 = 31.3% A3b2-M13 - Nilotic
1/32 = 3.1% B-M60 - Nilotic
13/32 = 40.6% E1b1b1a1b-V32 - North East Africa
6/32 = 18.8% E1b1b1a3-V22 - North East Africa
2/32 = 6.3% J-12f2(xJ2-M172) - Arabic


Copts (Agriculturists; n=33; Afro-Asiatic, Ancient Egyptian > Semitic)
5/33 = 15.2% B-M60 - Nilotic
2/33 = 6.1% E1b1b-M215(xE1b1b1a-M7.8. - North East Africa
5/33 = 15.2% E1b1b1a1-V12(xE1b1b1a1b-V32) North East Africa
13/33 = 39.4% J-12f2(xJ2-M172) Arabic
2/33 = 6.1% J2-M172 - Arabic
1/33 = 3.0% K-M9(xL-M11, O-M175, P-M74) - South West Asia
5/33 = 15.2% R1b1-P25 -- Chadic


Sudanese (Pastoralist/AgriPastoralist Nilotes (Dinka, Nuer, Shilluk) Nilo-Saharan, Eastern Sudanic)
A3B2 (28/53 = 52.8%), - Nilotic
B(16/53 = 30.2%), -Nilotic
E1b1b1a1 (V12+V22 +32)- 9/53 = 17.0%. - North East Africa


http://sudanforum.net/showthread.php?p=1474128


http://leherensuge.blogspot.com/2009/04/brief-review-of-recent-mtdna-h-info.html


____________________________________________________________________


quote:Originally posted by Doctoris Scientia:
Haplogroup J in itself is most likely African. J* peaks in territories near in or around Africa.

J2-M172 is African ...
J (Y-DNA), more than likely originated in East Africa also.

J1 moved into Yemen, While J2 spread from Egypt into the Levant

J1 were Nomads similar to the Beja and Tigre, While J2 were farmers in affiliation to Nile Valley populations.

Areas like Socotra (a few miles outside off of Somalia) still have the highest % of J*.

Both J1 and J2 have African origins...
J*(xJ1, J2) is the oldest form of J ever found, it was found in and near Africa.

70% J* in Socotra (Cerny)
7.7% J* in Oman (Di Giacomo)

According to the most recent studies, most of the "Eurasian" tagged haplogroups developed either in Africa or originated among populations who spanned between both "Southwest Asia" and Africa.

I have not wrote anything in awhile here.


quote:

Both J1 and J2 have African origins...

So this would be incorrect?
J1 and J2 is not african?


Anyway it seems to me that while most sudanese arabs do have euro-asian admixture from info i have seen far overtime,most sudanese do not have euro-asian admixture,and i am talking about northern sudan.

There are other africans in northern sudan that are not arab and did not mix with arabs.
I posted some info about the sudanese nubians too on the first page as well.

Topic: Nubian aDNA: what the hell is stopping ES members from claiming CL Fox 1997?
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=008387;p=6

Posts: 2109 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2987219/

The emergence of Y-chromosome haplogroup J1e among Arabic-speaking populations

Jacques Chiaroni 2010


Haplogroup J1 is a prevalent Y-chromosome lineage within the Near East. We report the frequency and YSTR diversity data for its major sub-clade (J1e). The overall expansion time estimated from 453 chromosomes is 10 000 years. Moreover, the previously described J1 (DYS388=13) chromosomes, frequently found in the Caucasus and eastern Anatolian populations, were ancestral to J1e and displayed an expansion time of 9000 years. For J1e, the Zagros/Taurus mountain region displays the highest haplotype diversity, although the J1e frequency increases toward the peripheral Arabian Peninsula. The southerly pattern of decreasing expansion time estimates is consistent with the serial drift and founder effect processes. The first such migration is predicted to have occurred at the onset of the Neolithic, and accordingly J1e parallels the establishment of rain-fed agriculture and semi-nomadic herders throughout the Fertile Crescent. Subsequently, J1e lineages might have been involved in episodes of the expansion of pastoralists into arid habitats coinciding with the spread of Arabic and other Semitic-speaking populations.

Posts: 32089 | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Firewall
Member
Member # 20331

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Firewall     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
By the way some of those sudanese arabs are racially white and some are racially brown,but most black arabized sudanese arabs do not have euro-asian admixture.
Remember many northern black sudanese became arabized to avoid raids and rape.
This info was mention in some of the nubian books and african history books i have read overtime.
I posted the info a number of times before.

Posts: 2109 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Firewall
Member
Member # 20331

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Firewall     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2987219/

The emergence of Y-chromosome haplogroup J1e among Arabic-speaking populations

Jacques Chiaroni 2010


Haplogroup J1 is a prevalent Y-chromosome lineage within the Near East. We report the frequency and YSTR diversity data for its major sub-clade (J1e). The overall expansion time estimated from 453 chromosomes is 10 000 years. Moreover, the previously described J1 (DYS388=13) chromosomes, frequently found in the Caucasus and eastern Anatolian populations, were ancestral to J1e and displayed an expansion time of 9000 years. For J1e, the Zagros/Taurus mountain region displays the highest haplotype diversity, although the J1e frequency increases toward the peripheral Arabian Peninsula. The southerly pattern of decreasing expansion time estimates is consistent with the serial drift and founder effect processes. The first such migration is predicted to have occurred at the onset of the Neolithic, and accordingly J1e parallels the establishment of rain-fed agriculture and semi-nomadic herders throughout the Fertile Crescent. Subsequently, J1e lineages might have been involved in episodes of the expansion of pastoralists into arid habitats coinciding with the spread of Arabic and other Semitic-speaking populations.

This is correct.
I posted some info about this before by the way on this forum.

I just sent a email to you about this with my further thoughts.

Posts: 2109 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Djehuti
Member
Member # 6698

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Djehuti     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by beyoku:

quote:
Other studies (PRÜFER ET AL 2014, MEYER ET AL 2012,
TISHKOFF ET AL 2009) have shown that, while the San and Mbuti are the most diverged
from all other populations sampled, the Mandenka and Yoruba populations have only
recently separated and the Dinka population shares some ancestry with non-African
populations. The San and Mbuti projections onto YRI show a slight excess of rare alleles,
suggesting some admixture from their ancestors into the ancestors of YRI


Note the above about the Dinka..........they "shares some ancestry with non-African
populations." According to Amun Ra the troll that should not be the case since they are mostly A/B non L3 population. And remember:

quote:
These results mean that we have not identified any sub-Saharan African sample that we are confident has no evidence of back-to-Africa migration. Our best candidate at present is the Dinka but it is possible that with a phased genome or large sample sizes we would detect evidence of non-African ancestry in this population as well.
 -

Dinka sit closest to Eurasians.....have less Neanderthal and Yoruba.....they are Primarily an A/B population........they share "some ancestry with non-African populations." yet they are the "best candidate at present" for a "sub-Saharan African sample that we are confident has no evidence of back-to-Africa migration"

Anyone looking for the context of the quote can simply GOOGLE IT.

This reminds me of the study 2016 Rotimi et al.
Ancient Human Migration after Out-of-Africa. Tell me Beyoku, what is your take of study? Do you believe there were more than one OOA expansions?

What about you Firewall or anyone else with sense?

I personally believe there are sequential OOA ancestries that were made cryptic due to expansions of various Sub-Saharan ancestries (pre-Bantu) as well as later back-migrations from Eurasia. This is why Lazaridis' so-called 'Basal Eurasian' may very well be one of those subsequent OOA ancestries.

--------------------
Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan.

Posts: 23494 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 6 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | EgyptSearch!

(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com

Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3