posted
Credit actually goes to beyoku for presenting this to everyone. And also credit to Firewall for actually PMing me this in the first place.
Anyways...This is really interesting and the fight for an African Ancient Egypt is starting to come to a close..
quote: OK A-M13 L3f Ok A-M13 L0a1 OK B-M150 L3d OK E-M2 L3e5 OK E-M2 L2a1 OK E-M123 L5a1 OK E-M35 R0a OK E-M41 L2a1 OK E-M41 L1b1a OK E-M75 M1 OK E-M78 L4b OK J-M267 L3i OK R-M173 L2 OK T-M184 L0a
He makes some really good points. It appears its not the full study and I think beyoku states he is not able to post the full one for some reason.
Posts: 1135 | From: Top secret | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
This seems to confirm the theory that Ancient Egyptians were composed of many different African ethnic groups who settled along the Nile during the dessication of the Sahara. Unified under one state by Narmer. All African people seem represented here from Nilo-Saharan to Niger-Congo speakers passing by Khoisan and Cushitic/Chadic speakers.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: This seems to confirm the theory that Ancient Egyptians were composed of many different African ethnic groups who settled along the Nile during the dessication of the Sahara. Unified under one state by Narmer. All African people seem represented here from Nilo-Saharan to Niger-Congo speakers passing by Khoisan and Cushitic/Chadic speakers.
Hmm, that's interesting. I could of sworn that you were criticising me a couple of days ago for ''not liking the DNA results'' when I said that the Sahel, Horner and Nilo-Saharan influences would dwarf the Bantu influences, and here are the results, vindicating my views with prophetic accuracy. Prey tell, where are the Bantu specific lineages dominating over Horner, Nilo-Saharan and Chadic specific lineages in this cross section of AE lineages?
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think beyoku says these results are not from royals in case anybody was wondering
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Doctoris Scientifica says: Most of these uni-paternal lineages appear either "Chadic" or "NE African"; these results suggest that both 1) the Sahelian region via the Central Sahara and 2) the Horn of Africa via the Eastern Sahara, played a role in the peopling of Ancient Egypt. The Eurasian lineages aren't out of the ordinary either.
The presence of "West African" lineages in Ancient Egypt also supports an ancient arrival of at least some of the West African admixture present in Egypt today.
^^All these African links again confirms what has already been found by studies in:
"The evidence also points to linkages to other northeast African peoples, not coincidentally approximating the modern range of languages closely related to Egyptian in the Afro-Asiatic group (formerly called Hamito-Semetic). These linguistic similarities place ancient Egyptian in a close relationship with languages spoken today as far west as Chad, and as far south as Somalia.
Archaeological evidence also strongly supports an African origin. A widespread northeastern African cultural assemblage, including distinctive multiple barbed harpoons and pottery decorated with dotted wavy line patterns, appears during the early Neolithic (also known as the Aqualithic, a reference to the mild climate of the Sahara at this time). Saharan and Sudanese rock art from this time resembles early Egyptian iconography. Strong connections between Nubian (Sudanese) and Egyptian material culture continue in later Neolithic Badarian culture of Upper Egypt. Similarities include black-topped wares, vessels with characteristic ripple-burnished surfaces, a special tulip-shaped vessel with incised and white-filled decoration, palettes, and harpoons...
Other ancient Egyptian practices show strong similarities to modern African cultures including divine kingship, the use of headrests, body art, circumcision, and male coming-of-age rituals, all suggesting an African substratum or foundation for Egyptian civilization.."
-- Source: Donald Redford (2001) The Oxford encyclopedia of ancient Egypt, Volume 3. Oxford University Press. p.28
-------------------- Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began.. Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: This seems to confirm the theory that Ancient Egyptians were composed of many different African ethnic groups who settled along the Nile during the dessication of the Sahara. Unified under one state by Narmer. All African people seem represented here from Nilo-Saharan to Niger-Congo speakers passing by Khoisan and Cushitic/Chadic speakers.
Hmm, that's interesting. I could of sworn that you were criticising me a couple of days ago for ''not liking the DNA results'' when I said that the Sahel, Horner and Nilo-Saharan influences would dwarf the Bantu influences, and here are the results, vindicating my views with prophetic accuracy. Prey tell, where are the Bantu specific lineages dominating over Horner and Chadic specific lineages in this cross section of AE lineages?
Please don't pollute this perfectly nice thread with your usual stupidity and red-herring tactics.
What I see here is that all African language families, thus all African people, are represented here. As I said above Nilo-saharans speakers, Niger-Congo (which include Bantu, Yoruba, Dogon, etc), Chadic/Cushitic and Khoisan speakers. That's the pan-African aspect that I like.
Ramses III was determined to be E1b1a, thus closer to West Africans and Bantu, but other royal mummy remains may be more nilotic or eastern Africans in ancestry. Same thing with the DNA Tribes results. It depends of which individual mummy remains are used for the study. This goes in line with the theory stated above than Ancient Egyptians were composed of many different African ethnic groups and lineages who settled along the Nile during the desertification of the Sahara.
I must admit I really like this pan-African aspect. As long as it's true of course. And indeed it seems all the DNA results seems to confirm that. As well as many other cultural and religious aspects like the traditional headrests found all over Africa.
Very good news. Can't wait to see the full study.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not polluting anything. This is a discussion board, if you're expecting cosy sentimental 'kumbaya' reactions to inconsistencies in your posts you're in the wrong place.
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: What I see here is that all African language families, thus all African people, are represented here.
Yeah, that's what you're saying right now, now that you've switched your pitch. You've been trolling the forum with your sloppy interpretation of the DNA Tribes results for years, trying to make a case for Mountain of the Moon Egyptians, accusing everyone who disagreed, based on clear cut mtDNA and NRY ties of a range of Northeast Africans populations and Chadic speakers to modern Egyptians, of being biased and ''not liking the DNA results''. Now you're suddenly flip flopping and mimicking what I said, as if you didn't damn near berated me for saying what these haplogroup results are confirming, and I'm supposed to not call you out? You are a very interesting character.
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: Ramses III was determined to be E1b1a, thus closer to West Africans and Bantu
No, he is not. You're just making that up. The provenance of non Bantu associated East African E-V38 (as exemplified by Ramses III's E-V38 and that of most East Africans that predate Bantu speakers in the area) is unknown, how many times must I tell you this? They're NOT West African/Bantu, until sharing with West African haplotypes has been demonstrated. Get it through your head for once.
quote:Haplogroups of the E1b1a clade, and in particular haplogroups E1b1a7 and E1b1a8 are most frequently found in West, Central and South East Africa, with a particular modal 6 NRY STR haplotype (15-12-21-10-11-13) considered a possible signature haplotype of the expansion of the Bantu speaking peoples (Thomas et al. 2000; Pereira et al. 2002; Veeramah et al. 2010). This STR haplotype was only observed in a single Anuak, the ethnic group with by far the highest frequency of E1b1a7. It was also observed in a single Amhara sample and two Dasanach.
--Plaster et al 2011
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: I think beyoku says these results are not from royals in case anybody was wondering
Nice try, but:
Comparisons of linear body proportions of Old Kingdom and non-Old Kingdom period individuals, and workers and high officials in our sample found no statistically significant differences among them. Zakrzewski (2003) also found little evidence for differences in linear body proportions of Egyptians over a wider temporal range.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: This seems to confirm the theory that Ancient Egyptians were composed of many different African ethnic groups who settled along the Nile during the dessication of the Sahara. Unified under one state by Narmer. All African people seem represented here from Nilo-Saharan to Niger-Congo speakers passing by Khoisan and Cushitic/Chadic speakers.
quote:"African peoples are the most diverse in the world whether analyzed by DNA or skeletal or cranial methods. The peoples of the Nile Valley vary but they are still related. The people most related ethnically to the ancient Egyptians are other Africans like Nubians not cold-climate/light skinned Europeans or Asiatics.
--Keita 1996; Rethelford, 2001; Bianchi 2004, Yurco 1989; Godde 2009
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: that's Raxter 2008 try Raxter 2011
Nice try, but:
quote: Bivariate analyses distinguishJebel Sahabafrom European and circumpolar samples, butdo not tend to segregate them from recent North or sub-Saharan African samples
T. W. Holliday* 2013 Population Affinities of the Jebel Sahaba Skeletal Sample: Limb Proportion Evidence
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
look at this, trying to argue "most diverse" but "no statistically significant differences" at the same time
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote: "Analysis of Predinastic skeletal material showed tropical African elements in the population of the earliest populations of the earliest Badarian culture" [...]
--Frank Yurco
quote: Little change in body shape was found through time, suggesting that all body segments were varying in size in response to environmental and social conditions. The change found in body plan is suggested to be the result of the later groups having a more tropical (Nilotic) form than the preceding populations.
--Sonia R. Zakrzewski, American Journal of Physical Anthropology Volume 121, Issue 3, pages 219–229, July 2003
quote: The results indicate overall population continuity over the Predynastic and early Dynastic, and high levels of genetic heterogeneity, thereby suggesting that state formation occurred as a mainly indigenous process. Nevertheless, significant differences were found in morphology between both geographically-pooled and cemetery-specific temporal groups, indicating that some migration occurred along the Egyptian Nile Valley over the periods&time; studied.
--Sonia R. Zakrzewski, American Journal of Physical Anthropology 2007
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
These results look funky...not right. Source???
especially this
OK J-M267 L3i OK R-M173(----R-V88??) L2 OK T-M184 L0a OK E-M35 R0a
quote:Originally :
[QUOTE] OK A-M13 L3f Ok A-M13 L0a1 OK B-M150 L3d OK E-M2 L3e5 OK E-M2 L2a1 OK E-M123 L5a1 OK E-M35 R0a OK E-M41 L2a1 OK E-M41 L1b1a OK E-M75 M1 OK E-M78 L4b OK J-M267 L3i OK R-M173 L2 OK T-M184 L0a
posted
Yeah. No source cited there either. All I see is A table with DNA results. No author, no reference etc.
The haplogroups are VERY diverse. Almost ALL African HG are represented. Data does not seem right. I am wondering if we are being played. That's all.
This combination looks strange
OK T-M184 L0a OK E-M35 R0a
-------------------- 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
^^^Didn't you read where I said beyoku couldn't post the whole article? We'll just have just have to wait and see. I trust beyoku wouldn't lie.
Just click on the link. I don't know if were being played but we're just going to have to see.
Posts: 1135 | From: Top secret | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
Also. No females were analyzed?
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Yeah. No source cited there either. All I see is A table with DNA results. No author, no reference etc.
The haplogroups are VERY diverse. Almost ALL African HG are represented. Data does not seem right. I am wondering if we are being played. That's all.
This combination looks strange
OK T-M184 L0a OK E-M35 R0a
Read the rest of that other thread. I few posters here know the story about the source.
Regarding the results what is strange about this? Do you know the range of T and L0a, m35 and R0a?
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Yeah. No source cited there either. All I see is A table with DNA results. No author, no reference etc.
The haplogroups are VERY diverse. Almost ALL African HG are represented. Data does not seem right. I am wondering if we are being played. That's all.
This combination looks strange
OK T-M184 L0a OK E-M35 R0a
Read the rest of that other thread. I few posters here know the story about the source.
Regarding the results what is strange about this? Do you know the range of T and L0a, m35 and R0a?
Do you know, or can you tell, when the study will be released or the name(s) of the researcher(s)? Thanks for posting it in advance, it's really appreciated.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Son of Ra: Credit actually goes to beyoku for presenting this to everyone. And also credit to Firewall for actually PMing me this in the first place.
Anyways...This is really interesting and the fight for an African Ancient Egypt is starting to come to a close..
quote: OK A-M13 L3f Ok A-M13 L0a1 OK B-M150 L3d OK E-M2 L3e5 OK E-M2 L2a1 OK E-M123 L5a1 OK E-M35 R0a OK E-M41 L2a1 OK E-M41 L1b1a OK E-M75 M1 OK E-M78 L4b OK J-M267 L3i OK R-M173 L2 OK T-M184 L0a
He makes some really good points. It appears its not the full study and I think beyoku states he is not able to post the full one for some reason.
Where are the New Kingdom results?? I take it OK and MK mean Old Kingdom and New Kingdom, respectively yet the title of this thread and Beyoku has New Kingdom.
Anyway, I am not at all surprised by these findings. Especially after the findings from DNA Tribes concerning the STRs. I am curious as to what those who claim that 'Moderns are the same as Ancients' have to say, especially when it's already established from the skeletal evidence that there is a significant change in phenotype between the ancients and today.
Speaking of which, are there any studies done on the gene-pool of modern rural Sa'idi?? Most genetic studies on modern Egyptians focus on urban areas of the Delta, but I don't hear much about rural populations in the southern valley.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: This seems to confirm the theory that Ancient Egyptians were composed of many different African ethnic groups who settled along the Nile during the dessication of the Sahara. Unified under one state by Narmer. **All African people seem represented here from Nilo-Saharan to Niger-Congo speakers passing by Khoisan and Cushitic/Chadic speakers.**
Hmm, that's interesting. I could of sworn that you were criticising me a couple of days ago for ''not liking the DNA results'' when I said that the Sahel, Horner and Nilo-Saharan influences would dwarf the Bantu influences, and here are the results, vindicating my views with prophetic accuracy. Prey tell, where are the Bantu specific lineages dominating over Horner, Nilo-Saharan and Chadic specific lineages in this cross section of AE lineages?
I don't know what the bickering is about but don't these haplogroups pre-date most of these language phyla anyway??
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: I think beyoku says these results are not from royals in case anybody was wondering
Does it matter? Unless you are suggesting that the royals' genetics differ significantly from the greater populace so as they are derived from different populations.
Recall the STR results for the royals per DNA Tribes.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I find it interesting that these people realize that playing the inauthentic DNA results card, as they did with the Hawass et al results, is only going to make them look like cretins this time around. I haven't seen a single butt-hurt Euronut try to emotionally cope with these results with that pre-defeated excuse, yet.
I'm surprised at the low level of instructive comments these people are capable of making about the DNA results. Among the few people who are saying something instructive aren't even native to that forum; they're (ex-)ES posters. They have a mod who tags the spread of Afro-Asiatic languages to the spread of R-V88 (a mid holocene lineage for Christ's sake), and denies an association of this Phylum with NRY E-M35
I've seen Euronuts say a lot, but I just wasn't prepared for that in 2013. I had to rub my eyes and re-read that. Makes me think ES really IS the place to be, even with all the house-hold nutjobs.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ LOL That's right, Swenet! The Euronuts are on their last leg and they know it!! I warned those fools years ago that the DNA on the ancient Egyptians will come out and when it does they won't like the results, but they were confident that it will go in their favor. It's just as I predicted! Ha ha ha
Speaking of fools, where is White Nobody?? You would think he would crash this thread big time due to the 'uncomfortable' findings. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: I warned those fools years ago that the DNA on the ancient Egyptians will come out
For some reason, the Euronuts didn't get the memo that it was an ominous sign (for their case) that the Egyptian authorities were committed to having these tests come out a certain way (showing ancient to modern genetic continuity), while they, at the same time, were unable to come out with results supporting their desired outcome. Not only were they unable to come up with DNA results that document this, they were chronically holding back hundreds of successfully sequenced aDNA results. Hawass and other proponents of the establishment have had ample opportunity and incentive to shut those darn Afrocentrists up, with all the genetic data they've been secretly holding on to. If I were an Euronut, this indecisiveness on the part of the Egyptian authorities would mean something to me.
posted
Armor King in forumbiodiversity has interesting posts. I am surprised they did not banned him yet.
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Modern Egyptian authorities can only play games for so long. The fact is while they withheld info on the Africaness of Egyptian Genetics, they were getting their asses handed to them on the Anthropology and Archeology side.
The poor Euroclown establishment only has Genetics to base their claims, I mean look at Cachibatches on Historum, he avoids Anthopology and physical remains like the plague and harps on distorted and debunked Genetic studies.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: I warned those fools years ago that the DNA on the ancient Egyptians will come out
For some reason, the Euronuts didn't get the memo that it was an ominous sign (for their case) that the Egyptian authorities were committed to having these tests come out a certain way (showing ancient to modern genetic continuity), while they, at the same time, were unable to come out with results supporting their desired outcome. Not only were they unable to come up with DNA results that document this, they were chronically holding back hundreds of successfully sequenced aDNA results. Hawass and other proponents of the establishment have had ample opportunity and incentive to shut those darn Afrocentrists up, with all the genetic data they've been secretly holding on to. If I were an Euronut, this indecisiveness on the part of the Egyptian authorities would mean something to me.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
As you can tell I have reservation since I was NOT privy to the INSIDE scoop....nevertheless...wasn't it you who had the inside scoop in the Amarna's being E1b1a(I am not talking about Rameses III).
Just saying.
don't you find it odd.. OK T-M184 L0a OK E-M35 R0a
I always speculated that AEian would be hg-A, E1b1b followed by E-M35 in that order.
Here is an interesting Table from Cruciani
-------------------- 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
Remember when many brothas here lost their heads when they heard the Tut was R1b-M269 I was one of the few here that remained cool. Why? Because primarily it did NOT make geographic sense.
This is welcome news but...
-------------------- 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
Wow i never seeen that chart before. I have to save it.
The dna info for the all nubian groups in sudan is not in that chart.
Keep in mind for the nubians that info is only for north sudan/nile valley nubians,not the central sudan or western sudan nubians in sudan.
The info for the A HAPLOGROUP for nubians(north sudan) is not included but other then that the overall info on average looks almost the same has the the info i posted awhile ago of course with some differences.
The songhai info looks interesting. I don't think i seen the info for the songhai before,but most of the others i have.
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: As you can tell I have reservation since I was NOT privy to the INSIDE scoop....nevertheless...wasn't it you who had the inside scoop in the Amarna's being E1b1a(I am not talking about Rameses III).
Just saying.
don't you find it odd.. OK T-M184 L0a OK E-M35 R0a
I always speculated that AEian would be hg-A, E1b1b followed by E-M35 in that order.
Here is an interesting Table from Cruciani
I think you have a problem with knowledge. This is why you have so many issues: First of all, "E1b1b" (assuming you mean E3b and NOT E-M215) IS "E-M35." Become familiar with the nomenclature. T-M184 peaks in Sub Saharan Africa at over 80% http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_T-M184#Africa
These exact configurations can be found easily in Ethiopia and Sudan. I have no idea why you find THESE lineage surprising. These are some of the LEAST surprising lineages along with the E-M78's M1a's and L2a1's.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you consider E descendant haplogroups to be African and F descendant to be foreign (Y-DNA). It's always surprising to find foreign DNA in any ancient populations. Like the black African presence is real but at the same time surprising and trivial in the Ancient Greece or Roman civilizations.
It's like the R-V88 found in high concentration in Cameroon or the high level of E haplogroup in the Balkans in Europe. It doesn't prevent those Balkans to look Europeans and those Cameroonian people to look (and 'be' of course) African in the full sense of the word.
In other words, someone can be 99% African and still carry a foreign haplogroup, like a F-descendant haplogroup. Y-DNA and MtDNA haplogroups form only a small part of your whole genome. Only the direct male and female line respectively.
This child for example can be a R-V88 carrier:
It's takes about 5 generations for some foreign Y-DNA to be over 90% localized if the foreign male and his descendents only intermarry with local females (and not within his foreign haplogroup).
For example, a F-descendant haplogroup can marry a local woman
1) F descendant male (R-V88 hg carrier) 100% foreign 2) Children with a local female = 50% foreign for the full genome (since about 50% comes from the local female) 3) their children = 25% 4) their children= 12.50% 5) and their children=6.25%
After 10 generations it must be much below 1% or in fact even much below 0.5%
(it's an approximation because it's not clear which genes will be transmitted from one generation to the next beside for Y-DNA of course which are only carried and transmitted from male to male)
Those children which only have 6.25% of foreign DNA after 5 generations (or less than 0.5% after 10 generations) still carry a F descendant haplogroup like R-V88. So in takes about 5 generations to be 93.75% local (when people only intermarry with locals and not within their haplogroups). In reality, it takes more generations since there's some level of intra-haplogroup interbreeding even if the majority of people around you are locals.
(obviously of those 6.25% DNA only a 0.1% are actually polymorphic in humans, but that's another subject)
If I made an error in my calculation or otherwise please tell me of course.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Thing is most of the geneticists reports support Hamiticism though they'd never admit it.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Yeah. No source cited there either. All I see is A table with DNA results. No author, no reference etc.
The haplogroups are VERY diverse. Almost ALL African HG are represented. Data does not seem right. I am wondering if we are being played. That's all.
This combination looks strange
OK T-M184 L0a OK E-M35 R0a
Interesting...it appears to support the Afro-asiatic myth.
.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Thing is most of the geneticists reports support Hamiticism though they'd never admit it.
What do you mean by this? In the results posted by Beyoku there's a diversity of mostly African genes, A, B, E, etc. The DNA tribes study points the 18th and 20th dynasty royal mummies to be closer to Great Lakes, Southern, West and Sahelian Africans than any other populations in the world (using the DNA tribe population database). Ramses III is determined to be E1b1a by another study.
It seems all the genetic analysis of ancient DNA all points the Ancient Egyptian civilizations to be formed by a wide variety of DNA and haplogroups, and thus people/lineages, now found all over Africa. It's hard to see it in any other way. If anything it support the theory that the Ancient Egyptian population was formed by a variety of African lineages and ethnic groups who settled along the Nile during the desertification of the Sahara.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
1st of all forget DNAtribes they ain't scientific they proprietary their results are not replicable because their data is private
Also there's more to it than just AE
Just as in Hamiticism emphasis is placed on North Africa(ns) as separate and unrelated to the rest of Africa(ns) also in the background macroHg E is proposed as a back migration
Private communication with certain geneticists reveals Fulani madness
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Just as in Hamiticism emphasis is placed on North Africa(ns) as separate and unrelated to the rest of Africa(ns) also in the background macroHg E is proposed as a back migration
Private communication with certain geneticists reveals Fulani madness
Ok, I understand what you mean, even if I don't really agree with you (hg E is rarely attributed be a back migration unlike F descendant hg for example which are truly the effect of back migration of course), but modern population DNA is not as important as aDNA from ancient remains. Almost all aDNA data we have at the moment support a wide range of African DNA in Ancient Egypt. For example, Ramses III is determined to be E1b1a which means many Africans (from so called sub-sahara Africa) share a common ancestor with him (the common ancestor who was the first to have the E1b1a defining mutation). I gave other examples in my posts above. A, B and E haplogroups are all African people who have a common geographic origin and interrelated history (in Ancient Egypt, but probably also in the Ancient Sahara and definitely in modern Africa).
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
Med, East, & North African E is the back migration focus
just as in Hamiticism
Raw data is one thing its interpretation is another
Access to reports is opening but notice the R-V88 south-north expansion report is safe behind a paywall
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: 1st of all forget DNAtribes they ain't scientific they proprietary their results are not replicable because their data is private
You have added this paragraph after I already replied to you above. Don't exaggerate things. DNA tribes is scientific. They used the STR values of royal mummies from the 18th and 20th Dynasty widely available from the peer reviewed studies -like the JAMA study- and inputed it in their population database. There's only a far off chance that their population database is wrong. Any person of have access to popaffiliator like software and a descent population database can run the STR values of the mummies remains and see what population it matches most (some did it with the same results). In fact, another study (completely peer reviewed this time) confirm that Ramsess III (20th Dynasty) is E1b1a which is an haplogroup which is most prevalent in the same region determined by DNA tribes, so?
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
DNAtribes is not scientific
replicability is the hallmark of science
the JAMA is not DNAtribes anybody can use JAMA the way DNAtribes did check ES archives for examples
RIII's hg owes nothing to DNAtribes
Bottomline u have no idea of the data behind any actual DNAtribes digest entries
Scientific studies/reports data is upfront
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Med, East, & North African E is the back migration focus
just as in Hamiticism
Raw data is one thing its interpretation is another
Access to reports is opening but notice the R-V88 south-north expansion report is safe behind a paywall
I don't know what to say to you. I don't know if you're in a masochist mood or something. But you seem to make a great effort to see so called "hamiticism" where there is none. What you post is only one website which could have been written by me or white nubian. I read many peer-reviewed reports about hg E and frankly, I never read it to be the product of a back migration. They always say it originated in Eastern Africa, like most modern African people and languages for that matter.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Cut the pop-psych bullshit I mean I could say you're in a full of **** mood but that's got nothing to do with the matter
Genebase is a popular personal&population genetics website
It's one example and they give scientific sources
The E as back migration goes back to an old Cruciani study and has never totally died.
U c there's more you never read than what u have read
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: DNAtribes is not scientific
replicability is the hallmark of science
the JAMA is not DNAtribes anybody can use JAMA the way DNAtribes did check ES archives for examples
RIII's hg owes nothing to DNAtribes
Bottomline u have no idea of the data behind any actual DNAtribes digest entries
Scientific studies/reports data is upfront
I already told you. DNA tribes used the str of mummies from the JAMA report and inputed it in their database (which is indeed commercial and secret). The finding about Ramses III being E1b1a is not related at all to DNA tribes, but it confirm the geographic location determined by DNA Tribes. As E1b1a is found in great frequency in those same regions. It's a confirmation.
Even if you didn't have the DNA Tribes report, you are force to admit that most so-called sub-saharan African (like West, Great Lakes or Southern Africans) and Ramsess III share a common ancestor. The ancestor who had the E1b1a defining mutation in the first place (somewhere in Eastern Africa).
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Where the **** r u comin' from?
Who said RIII was unrelated to most Africans?
See what I wrote on RIII's hg based on that same BMJ Hawass2012
Slow the **** down
because I see shrouded Hamiticism in geneticists reports doesn't mean I believe or support Hamiticism
U r just lookin 4 a fight instead of digesting what I m sayin'
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Cut the pop-psych bullshit I mean I could say you're in a full of **** mood but that's got nothing to do with the matter
Genebase is a popular personal&population genetics website
It's one example and they give scientific sources
The E as back migration goes back to an old Cruciani study and has never totally died.
U c there's more you never read than what u have read
I don't know but most modern report have determined hg E to have originated in Eastern Africa.
Here's what the same Cruciani said about E-P2 (father to both E-215(E-M78, E-M35, E1b1b) and E-M2 (E1b1a):
quote:Using the principle of the phylogeographic parsimony, the resolution of the E1b1b trifurcation in favor of a common ancestor of E-M2 and E-M329 strongly supports the hypothesis that haplogroup E1b1 originated in eastern Africa , as previously suggested [10], and that chromosomes E-M2, so frequently observed in sub-Saharan Africa, trace their descent to a common ancestor present in eastern Africa .
This is from A New Topology of the Human Y Chromosome Haplogroup E1b1 (E-P2) Revealed through the Use of Newly Characterized Binary Polymorphisms (2011) By Cruciani and Trombetta
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Where the **** r u comin' from?
Who said RIII was unrelated to most Africans?
See what I wrote on RIII's hg based on that same BMJ Hawass2012
Slow the **** down
because I see shrouded Hamiticism in geneticists reports doesn't mean I believe or support Hamiticism
U r just lookin 4 a fight instead of digesting what I m sayin'
I'm not looking for a fight, I just disagree with you about that point about hamiticism, and I tell you why. Typical in a discussion forum. Don't be too sensitive. The Cruciani quote above refute your claims.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
Topic Closed
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
That's right, Swenet! The Euronuts are on their last leg and they know it!! I warned those fools years ago that the DNA on the ancient Egyptians will come out and when it does they won't like the results, but they were confident that it will go in their favor. It's just as I predicted! Ha ha ha 
Printer-friendly view of this topic