The above map is a Lancaster chart from the aforementioned article branches stemming from Ethiopia
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Tukuler: al~Takruri prepared comparative charts from three of the latest uniparental reports that included Berbers Maghrebis and or littoral North Africans in an attempt to ascertain if Berbers are not primarily African.
Becoming Eloquent: Advances in the Emergence of Language, Human Cognition ... edited by Francesco D'Errico, Jean Marie Hombert p135
_____________________________
The Complex and Diversified Mitochondrial Gene Pool of Berber Populations
C. Coudray1∗ , A. Olivieri2, A. Achilli2,3, M. Pala2, M. Melhaoui4, M. Cherkaoui5, F. El-Chennawi6, M. Kossmann7, A. Torroni2 and J. M. Dugoujon1 1Laboratoire d’Anthropobiologie, CNRS FRE2960, Universite´ Paul Sabatier, Toulouse, France
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: the point is you've been saying the berbers are from the West. Most berbers (except Siwa) carry high M81 frequencies. If Lancaster is correct, this leads back to what is thought to be the ancestor of M81, M35, in East Africa. And that's supposedly, the paternal root
He believed the haplogroup originated in the Sahel . read pp.48-52 of the article.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: the point is you've been saying the berbers are from the West. Most berbers (except Siwa) carry high M81 frequencies. If Lancaster is correct, this leads back to what is thought to be the ancestor of M81, M35, in East Africa. And that's supposedly, the paternal root
He believed the haplogroup originated in the Sahel . read pp.48-52 of the article.
.
Y Haplogroups, A Review of the Possibility of Multidisciplinary Comparisons Using the Case of Haplogroup E-M35
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Sanchez-Quinto's (2012 with Botigue, Comas & Lalueza-Fox co-authors) Table 1 clearly quantifies their Figure 1.
Here are those charts reordered from inner Africa to Atlantic and Mediterranean North Africa to European Union Mediterranean countries along with the Canaries.
My Maghreb, Berber, and North African frequencies respect Sanchez-Quinto's assignment of geographic ancestries, which are in his own words, labeled according to the region where the component is the commonest.
How does Sanchez-Quinto's genetic report show support or disconfirmation of the statement Berbers are not primarily African?
His pertinent national samples say
* Egypt is not primarily African * Libya is not primarily African * Tunisia is primarily African * S Maroc is primarily African * W Sahara is primarily African * Algeria is primarily African * N Maroc is primarily African.
Above are the African vs non-African SNP frequencies of each selected African nation and grouped views of them as
* an Atlanto-Mediterranean Africa superset * a limited Tamazgha subset, and * a core Maghreb subset.
All three sets refute Berbers not primarliy African. All three sets support Berbers are primarily African.
Sanchez-Quinto's study is focused on North African populations. It attempts to discern Neanderthal genome influx.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Trollkillah # Ish Gebor:
See, all Africans are rooted in the same. Northeast, Northwest, Central, West, East, South Africa.
If the ancestors of contemporary white Europeans who currently live in South Africa remain there for 10,000 years will they become biologically African?
For the Love of God, why are you this dumb?
quote: PC correlates and component loadings (Figure 2) showed a pattern similar to average hg frequencies (Table 2) in both large meta-population sets, with the LBK dataset grouping with Europeans because of a lack of mitochondrial African hgs (L and M1) and preHV, and elevated frequencies of hg V.
--Wolfgang Haak,. Ancient DNA from European Early Neolithic Farmers Reveals Their Near Eastern Affinities
See, all Africans are rooted in the same. Northeast, Northwest, Central, West, East, South Africa.
quote:
Our results demonstrate an ancient local evolution in Tunisia of some African haplogroups (L2a, L3*, and L3b).
Central Africa 42.4 75.0 (2.7) 9.2 24.1 (2.8) 0.1 0.9 (0.2)
North Africa 35.0 7.4 (2.7) 6.6 67.0 (4.0) 0.6 25.7 (3.1)
South Africa 3.2 86.7 (4.3) 0.1 13.3 (4.3)
South Africa (southern)1.8 83.4 (3.7) 0.1 16.6 (3.7)
By now, it's confirmed that you don't understand what nuclear resolutions are. And this is essentially the problem you have.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: the point is you've been saying the berbers are from the West. Most berbers (except Siwa) carry high M81 frequencies. If Lancaster is correct, this leads back to what is thought to be the ancestor of M81, M35, in East Africa. And that's supposedly, the paternal root
Oh, Heavenly Father!
The point being is that E-M81 evolved in Northwest Africa, by local evolution, about 7-6Kya.
Why can't you just understand this?
We have been posting evidence for a while now.
quote: These minor imprints may represent movements from Sahel's more central and eastern parts, seen, for example, in the typically Ethiopian/Sudanese E3*-PN2 lineages that have reached Senegambia [2,3,5].
--A Rosa - 2007,. Y-chromosomal diversity in the population of Guinea-Bissau: a multiethnic perspective
quote:This site has been called Gobero, after the local Tuareg name for the area. About 10,000 years ago (7700–6200 B.C.E.), Gobero was a much less arid environment than it is now. In fact, it was actually a rather humid lake side hometown of sorts for a group of hunter-fisher-gatherers who not only lived their but also buried their dead there. How do we know they were fishing? Well, remains of large nile perch and harpoons were found dating to this time period.
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: All three sets refute Berbers not primarliy African. All three sets support Berbers are primarily African.
^This is a circular argument:
quote:The fallacy of circular reasoning occurs when the conclusion of an argument is essentially the same as one of the premises in the argument. Circular reasoning is an inference drawn from a premise that includes the conclusion, and used to prove the conclusion.
Your conclusion: Berbers are genetically primarily African. Your premise: Berbers are primarily made up of a component which occurs in Africa. Your conclusion is just another way of stating your premise. In other words, your argument requires evidence that the origin of this component is African, independent of any back-flow (which you've left untouched). What does the actual paper say about the origin/affinity of this component?
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: the point is you've been saying the berbers are from the West. Most berbers (except Siwa) carry high M81 frequencies. If Lancaster is correct, this leads back to what is thought to be the ancestor of M81, M35, in East Africa. And that's supposedly, the paternal root
He believed the haplogroup originated in the Sahel . read pp.48-52 of the article.
.
Y Haplogroups, A Review of the Possibility of Multidisciplinary Comparisons Using the Case of Haplogroup E-M35
However M81 did not originate in the horn. It originated in the Maghreb.
M35 is thought to be it's parent and thought to originate in the horn maybe.
Therefore berbers are less horny than Ethiopians
.
For the Lord's sake,
Nuclear Hg F isn't even Eurasian in it's root.
quote:Haplogroup F is thought to represent a second and later stage of human migration out of Africa 50 thousand years ago (kya)(see Figures 4 and 5)."
quote:Haplogroup F is the parent haplogroup for all of the Y-DNA haplogroups from G through R. More than 90% of the world's human population descends from this group. Because these haplogroups are found almost entirely outside of sub-Saharan Africa, it is presumed that either the population migrating out of Africa was Haplogroup F or Haplogroup F appeared soon after the emigration from Africa, about sixty to eightly thousand years ago. Some argue the emigration was as late as 45,000 years ago.
Today, Haplogroup F is uncommon compared to its "offspring." It is not well studied as most of the attention has been paid to their descendant haplogroups.
Haplogroup F is most frequent on the Indian subcontinent and is rare in Europe, so rare that a Y-DNA Haplogroup F Project has only just been formed (as of November, 2007). Your project admin recommends this individual join this project, in addition to Danish Demes.
quote:In human genetics, Haplogroup F* (M89) is a Y-chromosome haplogroup (Note: due to technical restrictions, the title of this page does not contain an "*").
This haplogroup first appeared in Africa some 45,000 years before present. It is believed to represent the "second-wave" of expansion out of Africa.
Haplogroup F* is an ancestral haplogroup to Y-chromosome haplogroups G (M201), H (M52), I (M170), J (12f2.1), and K (M9) along with its descendant haplogroups (L, M, N, O, P, Q, and R).
posted
Sigh! shaking head....that is the problem with the colonial negro mind. Asking stupid questions. The question should be...what is your basis/evidence to the origin? These authors don't know. These authors research and publish the results inferring what it means. Some of us are really colonial minded slave stupid negros. But your heart is in the right place. Continue believing white hunter gathers women entered Africa 12000ya.
I have a bridge to sell. Ha!
ARTU=Sweety
quote:Originally posted What does the actual paper say about the origin of this component? [/QB]
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
FYI. Haplotypes diversity is significantly more telling than the "assumed" age of a haplogroup. But you know that already.......wink wink
-------------------- 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
Anyone has the new Kefi (2014) paper on Tunisians. Abstract got my attention. Seems to support what I have saying all along. Damn I am good!!!
Lioness get to work. My sources are drying up. A lot of questions may be answered. It seems Jerba Berbers are closely related to Sardinians.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ok. No response . Think of it like apples. You have a small basket containing 10 different types of apples. Eg red, green etc. However your Neighbor has a truckload containing ONLY 5 different types. This is what we are looking at. All haplotypes of hg-H found in Europe is found in Africa plus MORE!! That is why frequency means....dick. I hope get it and stop regurgitating nonsense.
In other words even with hg-H Europeans are a subset of Africans.
Any questions ..hit me up.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Some of you regurgitate stuff without a clue. Do you know why Cruiciani was recently proven wrong on the back migration of R-V88? Same analogy. Inner Africans haplotypic diversity is greater than those found in Algeria and Siwa etc. proving the migration was outwards. Take notes when I post.
"I am out!" No dogma with this brotha
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
A lot of rhetoric with no raw data behind it.
Your opinion is fine and is just that your opinion.
I'll stick with the raw data thank you.
For this thread's exercise I also honored the geographies geneticist chose. I'm not one to assume my view is the one and only truth. I think one connotation of dogma is declaring one view as the one and the only bona fide "truth." Truth is belief, i.e, religion. Science deals in facts and allows for various interpretations of them.
I did not alter anything so as to slant to my view. For instance data shows Egyptians, very few who are Berber, are not primarily African. The same can basically be said for Libyans. Even in at least one case certain group sets are not primarily African. But when all the data from from 6 different sources is "pooled" Berbers are primarily African.
The uniparentals showed that. The above SNPs show that. The earlier posted skylines have shown it too.
Without twisting geographies as laid out by the reports themselves I invite you and anyone else who's capable to present raw data from a variety of legitimate studies that show Berbers are not primarily African. I welcome and await it.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: All three sets refute Berbers not primarliy African. All three sets support Berbers are primarily African.
^This is a circular argument:
quote:The fallacy of circular reasoning occurs when the conclusion of an argument is essentially the same as one of the premises in the argument. Circular reasoning is an inference drawn from a premise that includes the conclusion, and used to prove the conclusion.
Your conclusion: Berbers are genetically primarily African. Your premise: Berbers are primarily made up of a component which occurs in Africa. Your conclusion is just another way of stating your premise. In other words, your argument requires evidence that the origin of this component is African, independent of any back-flow (which you've left untouched). What does the actual paper say about the origin/affinity of this component?
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Some are ignorant of the concept of pooling, its significance, too bad for them. Definitely agenda driven, they will rant when scientific evidence goes against their personal outlook. Should the science support them, not a peep.
= = = = =
As an addendum to my last post I might add the following, so as to reduce confusion.
Berbers being genetically primarily African has absolutely no Pan-African significance whatsoever.
I used Lioness' stipulations but nonetheless the deep rooted African genetic foundation of North African Berber precedent populations has been continuously augumented by various Eurasian influxes since the Pleistocene/Holocene cusp on up to today. Things continuing as they are now their continued preference, particularly for Spanish women, will in time make them even less and less genetically primarily African, and the African margin is not great at all at the present time.
Since the last desertification of the Sahara the littoral Maghreb has been a major part of both the circum-Mediterranean world and became Arabized (not just Islamicized) in speech and outlook.
They really don't look southward to the rest of Africa for much of anything.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: truthfully , to be more precise the Y DNA of berbers on average is primarily African while their mtDNA is Eurasian
That is what distinguishes them from Sub Saharans who are primarily African in both Y and mtDNA
/close thread
Sad, how this person still doesn't get it!
Some of the so famously acclaimed Eurasian mtDNA is actually African in origin, this what people are trying to explain to you here 15 pages long.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Trollkillah # Ish Gebor:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: truthfully , to be more precise the Y DNA of berbers on average is primarily African while their mtDNA is Eurasian
That is what distinguishes them from Sub Saharans who are primarily African in both Y and mtDNA
/close thread
Sad, how this person still doesn't get it!
Some of the so famously acclaimed Eurasian mtDNA is actually African in origin, this what people are trying to explain to you here 15 pages long.
quote:Originally posted by Tukular
When you say "people" do you mean you and xyyman? Clyde and Swenet even felt compelled to write their own threads for alternative points of view and Amun Ra is not in your camp either on this. You are out to lunch, haven't been following
So you are saying we should disregard the above charts compiled by Tukular which indicate higher maternal Eurasian mtDNA?
"people" is just you and xyyman
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: There is NO such things as Eurasian ancestry.
^^^ this is what I'm supposed to "get" ?
Although Tukualr might have some issues with how certain haplogroups are categorized bewteen African and Eurasian,
for the purposes of argument he accepted the authors of these articles indications. He has not spent this thread questioning those indications. That was not the theme of this thread. You have not been following for 15 pages
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: A lot of rhetoric with no raw data behind it.
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Your opinion is fine and is just that your opinion.
At your own invitation expressed earlier in this thread, I'm addressing something you said, only to have you use these blatant cop-outs. Sorry, but whether or not some author agrees with your views is not a matter of one's personal view. Whether the literature perceives some genetic component to be of African provenance is not a matter of personal view. It's up to you to present the facts as they are. Tacitly flipping the script on the person who's telling you this and insinuating that they're being dogmatic for not accepting your circular reasoning is beyond childish. You keep citing so and so under the pretence that so and so "respects" a certain author, or that so and so promotes your view "according to their own labelling", only to admit that you don't care about what any of those authors said; you just want to stick to "raw data".
I don't see what personal opinions have to do with my asking you to do what you set out to do: demonstrate that the component you call African is really African; not just opportunistically using some author's superficial labelling (rather than their explicit explanations) as evidence of literary support for your "primary African" claim.
You had a problem with Lioness having her own views about Berbers, but as soon as your own views are up for scrutiny, you cop-out by saying everyone can have their own view. What makes addressing your blatant omissions any different from you doing the same with Lioness' original statement that Berbers are not primarily African?
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Anyone got this new Kefi paper? I am more interested in the bold.
Also why Valencia? Any guesses?
===== Phylogeny and genetic structure of Tunisians and their position within Mediterranean populations
-Kefi 2014
Abstract Tunisia is located at the crossroads of Europe, the Middle East and Sub-Saharan Africa. This position might lead to numerous waves of migrations, contributing to the current genetic landscape of Tunisians. In this study, we analyzed 815 mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) sequences from Tunisia in order to characterize the mitochondrial DNA genetic structure of this region, to construct the processes for its composition and to compare it to other Mediterranean populations. To that end, additional 4206 mtDNA sequences were compiled from previous studies performed in African (1237), Near Eastern (231) and European (2738) populations. Both phylogenetic and statistical analyses were performed. This study confirmed the mosaic genetic structure of the Tunisian population with the predominance of the Eurasian lineages, followed by the Sub-Saharan and North African lineages. Among Tunisians, the highest haplogroup and haplotype diversity were observed in particular in the Capital Tunis. No significant differentiation was observed between both geographical (Northern versus Southern Tunisia) and different ethnic groups in Tunisia. Our results highlight the presence of outliers and most frequent unique sequences in Tunisia (10.2%) compared to 45 Mediterranean populations. Phylogenetic analysis showed that the majority of Tunisian localities were closer to North Africans and Near Eastern populations than to Europeans. The exception was found for Berbers from Jerba which are clustered with Sardinians and Valencians.Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Come on people talk to me. Here is a puzzle. Use that big brain. No dogma. Why are Jerba Berbers, Spanish Velencians and European Sardinian closely connected? Did white European women hunters from both Spain and European Sardinia sail to the Jerba island 12000ya hunting for food? Or as Lioness suggested...the men decided to go back home. Lol!
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Anyone got this new Kefi paper? I am more interested in the bold.
Also why Valencia? Any guesses?
===== Phylogeny and genetic structure of Tunisians and their position within Mediterranean populations
-Kefi 2014
Abstract Tunisia is located at the crossroads of Europe, the Middle East and Sub-Saharan Africa. This position might lead to numerous waves of migrations, contributing to the current genetic landscape of Tunisians. In this study, we analyzed 815 mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) sequences from Tunisia in order to characterize the mitochondrial DNA genetic structure of this region, to construct the processes for its composition and to compare it to other Mediterranean populations. To that end, additional 4206 mtDNA sequences were compiled from previous studies performed in African (1237), Near Eastern (231) and European (2738) populations. Both phylogenetic and statistical analyses were performed. This study confirmed the mosaic genetic structure of the Tunisian population with the predominance of the Eurasian lineages, followed by the Sub-Saharan and North African lineages. Among Tunisians, the highest haplogroup and haplotype diversity were observed in particular in the Capital Tunis. No significant differentiation was observed between both geographical (Northern versus Southern Tunisia) and different ethnic groups in Tunisia. Our results highlight the presence of outliers and most frequent unique sequences in Tunisia (10.2%) compared to 45 Mediterranean populations. Phylogenetic analysis showed that the majority of Tunisian localities were closer to North Africans and Near Eastern populations than to Europeans. The exception was found for Berbers from Jerba which are clustered with Sardinians and Valencians.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Man. The geneticists are tripping over themselves publishing and admiting that preNeolithic/early Neolithic Europeans had black skin. I can't keep up! Lol! This is fun times! Now Jablonski (2013) don't want to be left out. Table S1 of her new paper data showing early Kurgans were black skinned carry ancestral forms of Slc45A2, TYR etc.
Europhiles are on the ropes. Lol!
To those who read Sergi's book. He also proposed the early Kurgans were Eurafricans.
Point? Proving yet again there is no race....
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
. I made it plain I want this thread as robust as possible.
Nobody had to start alternative threads to express their view. I invited Clyde to park all his stuff here. I didn't personally invite Swenet but he too is for sure welcome to post his viewpoint here (sans annoying distractive gifs that make the thread clownish).
And yes I explicitly wrote when I posted my first analysis that I'm ignoring assignment controversies so as to let the reports as published speak through their raw data.
I noted where authors recognized that a given haplogroup assignment can and does differ from its parent or umbrella macrohaplogroup geography.
A child is not the parent and the reductio ad absurdum argument about lumping all children by their parent's geography ultimately resolves to making them all African.
Strongly opinionated objectors don't care. They only care for their own point of view regardless of attempted objectivity. If they want to broach grandstanding emotionally appealing threads let 'em.
The problem I'm having with autosomals is that of the recent studies I found with pertinent STRUCTURE or ADMIXTURE skylines (Henn, Botigue, Sanchez-Quinto) only the one I posted yesterday clearly delineates geographies.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
I don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about. Do you?
Answering a question in both affirmative and negative response is not circular argument. It's not an argument at all it's a conclusion. Maybe something more like modus tallens or modus ponens or something (I haven't done philosophy type logic since university)?
Humans are mammals. (therefore) Humans are not non-mammals.
Berbers are primarily African therefore Berbers are not primarily not-African.
The foregoing raw data confirmed Berbers are primarily African therefore The foregoing raw data refuted Berbers are not primarily African
Simply affirmative and negative response.
Neither of my statements is a premise. They are both conclusions derived from examination of raw data. Why you twist them into a premise - conclusion type relationship shows your comprehension is weak or sinister and beyond childish just something to puff yourself up.
Can you contribute info on the topic header or something related to the threads subject no matter how peripheral?
I'm not wasting time vindicating myself. This thread is for discussing Imazighen not how bad a guy Tukuler is. Yeah, I know it's not ES w/o banter.
I invite you to post whatever you want about why the geneticists' assignments are wrong but that won't change their published assessments making them conform to your opinion. It will round out the thread and contribute to its robustness.
Thanks!
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by xyyman:
Why are Jerba Berbers, Spanish Velencians and European Sardinian closely connected? Did white European women hunters from both Spain and European Sardinia sail to the Jerba island 12000ya hunting for food? Or as Lioness suggested...the men decided to go back home.
I dunno but just the other day I read some North African mtDNA was in the founder population of Sardinia.
This makes me rethink directionality of certain attributes claimed to be Euro infusion to Afr (in regards to late Neolithic and Chalcolithic archaeology).
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Answering a question in both affirmative and negative response is not circular argument.
Any child can tell that the following passage in your post harbours both a premise and a conclusion:
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: I also have three autosome skylines. They too support Berbers are primarily Africa, and they hi-lite the local contribution as dominant.
Any child can tell that the above, is just a circular argument on your part in the following format:
Your conclusion: Berbers are genetically primarily African.
Your premise: Berbers are primarily made up of a component which occurs in Africa.
Question you apparently want no one to ask you (because you repeatedly cop out as soon as someone does):
How did you bridge the humongous gap in logic from making the observation that the Maghreb component exclusively occurs in the Maghreb, that it can be counted as among that which is "African", other than making gratuitous use of unfortunate labelling (e.g. that the authors called it "Maghreb")?
You never did and you got defensive when you were asked to.
Anyone can see that your tacit insinuation that the component that defines Berber speakers "is African because it resides in/is designated as Maghreb" doesn't prove your assertion that it is African. It's just a reflection of your own unproven view that it is African, masquerading as "evidence", hence, it's a circular argument.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
I repeat. There is no such thing as European AIM. aDNA is going to change history. Loving it! My advice get in on it. Oh! The male Haplogroup wasn’t disclosed. My guess the missing European males Lioness was talking about did not go back home but migrated to inner Africa. Wink wink.
This is out of control of the Europhiles hands. Everyone has an ADNA Machine!!! They will lose control.
===== April 11, 2014 , Telus CC Exhibit Hall E2 An infant skeleton was recovered from the 6G8 cemetery (Christian Period, 500-1400 C.E.) during excavation in what is present-day Wadi Halfa, located near the Second Cataract of the Nile in the Republic of the Sudan. Skeletal material from Wadi Halfa represents one of the most analyzed archaeological populations in the world. Building upon the research of Dr. George Armelagos and others, this study presents preliminary results of the first ancient DNA (aDNA) analysis of an individual from this population. Analysis was carried out at the Molecular Population Genetics laboratory in the Smurfit Institute of Genetics at Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland. Using next-generation sequencing (NGS) techniques, DNA was extracted from a portion of cranial bone, indexed libraries were prepared, and the genome was sequenced on the Illumina platform using a MiSeq Personal Sequencer. Analysis of sequencing results indicated 0.59% endogenous DNA. Principle component analysis (PCA) was performed; despite a low number of SNPs, the individual was placed between African and European clusters. Using a method developed in Trinity’s Molecular Population Genetics laboratory, the individual was sexed as a male. Haplogroup was assessed by analyzing SNPs from the mitochondrial chromosome with HaploGrep. The individual was assigned to L5a1a, a branch of the ancient L5 haplogroup with origins in East Africa.
This study demonstrates the potential to gain unique insight into Nubian populations through aDNA analysis. Additional aDNA analysis of the Nubians will provide invaluable information regarding genetic influence and gene flow in individuals occupying ancient Nubia.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
April 11, 2014 , Telus CC Exhibit Hall E2 Over five field seasons, 2008-2012, two ancient Kenyan Swahili sites were excavated. Mtwapa (ca. 1000-1750 CE) and Manda (ca. 800-1600 CE) were once wealthy, cosmopolitan polities involved in the Indian Ocean trade network. Both towns had populations of 5,000-10,000 at their height of occupation, and had large central mosques with adjacent cemeteries. Genetic data collected from individuals sampled at these sites is currently being used to discern the burial trends of the Swahili, as well as whether the Swahili practiced matrilocal residence patterns. As Swahili burials typically contain no grave goods, genetic information is able to provide valuable data regarding burial patterning and social structure at these sites. Mtwapa excavations occurred between 2008 and 2011 and produced a minimum of 87 individuals buried across 13 crypts in the cemetery located next to the central mosque, with an average of 7 individuals per crypt. Crypts contained both men and women, as well as children, and all individuals uncovered were lain on their right side, extended, facing mecca. Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) extractions from teeth have been performed on 73 of these individuals, and Y-chromosome studies are set to begin this fall. The presence of mtDNA haplotypes of both West-Central and East African origin have been noted in preliminary sequence analysis of the first Hypervariable Region (HVRI) of the control region. Excavations at Manda began in December 2012, with a total of 19 individuals being exhumed. Extractions began in September of 2013, and preliminary sequence data is expected in Winter 2013/14. This research was funded by African Research Council and National Science Foundation (BCS 1029433) grants to Williams and Kusimba
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
Who do you think you are to tell me the purpose of what I design, write, and post and to continue doing so after I clarified your lamebrained misconception. This is the perfect example of a dogmatic ideologue ramrodding their opinion in the face of fact.
One more time for the shameless Mr Twist-it.
Just like in the other analyses those closing affirmative negative sentences are answers to a question.
Note: the underscored question at top the underscored answer at bottom.
* Egypt is not primarily African * Libya is not primarily African * Tunisia is primarily African * S Maroc is primarily African * W Sahara is primarily African * Algeria is primarily African * N Maroc is primarily African.
Above are the African vs non-African SNP frequencies of each selected African nation and grouped views of them as
* an Atlanto-Mediterranean Africa superset * a limited Tamazgha subset, and * a core Maghreb subset.
Now that's the actual string you originally replied to, not the switcheroo you offer now similarly presented completely out of context so much better to dupe the inattentive.
You go on with your bullshit because it angers and dismays you that Berbers are primarily African, local African, scientifically documented by these latest reports of uniparentals and autosomes whose presented geographies are exactly as the authors labeled them.
You can continue to fume on and believe Maurusians and Capsians are Iberians or some other fairytale folk and post more rhetoric or you can do what we all know you are more than capable of doing: hit us up with science on the topic.
Your options: 1 - More impotent rhetoric; not worth my time to further respond 2 - Pertinent info on the subject header; enlightenment from you we all will appreciate.
You can go on and on forever with lying rhetoric but all your rhetoric cannot ever change the raw data and the conclusions inferred from the raw data.
You have not succeeded in diverting, obscuring, or detracting from the point of attention, the raw data.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Answering a question in both affirmative and negative response is not circular argument.
Any child can tell that the following passage in your post harbours both a premise and a conclusion:
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: I also have three autosome skylines. They too support Berbers are primarily Africa, and they hi-lite the local contribution as dominant.
Any child can tell that the above, is just a circular argument on your part in the following format:
Your conclusion: Berbers are genetically primarily African.
Your premise: Berbers are primarily made up of a component which occurs in Africa.
Question you apparently want no one to ask you (because you repeatedly cop out as soon as someone does):
How did you bridge the humongous gap in logic from making the observation that the Maghreb component exclusively occurs in the Maghreb, that it can be counted as among that which is "African", other than making gratuitous use of unfortunate labelling (e.g. that the authors called it "Maghreb")?
You never did and you got defensive when you were asked to.
Anyone can see that your tacit insinuation that the component that defines Berber speakers "is African because it resides in/is designated as Maghreb" doesn't prove your assertion that it is African. It's just a reflection of your own unproven view that it is African, masquerading as "evidence", hence, it's a circular argument.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler:
quote:Originally posted by xyyman:
Why are Jerba Berbers, Spanish Velencians and European Sardinian closely connected? Did white European women hunters from both Spain and European Sardinia sail to the Jerba island 12000ya hunting for food? Or as Lioness suggested...the men decided to go back home.
I dunno but just the other day I read some North African mtDNA was in the founder population of Sardinia.
This makes me rethink directionality of certain attributes claimed to be Euro infusion to Afr (in regards to late Neolithic and Chalcolithic archaeology).
Anna Olivieri (with Achilli Pala Battaglia Al-Zahery Scozzari Cruciani Behar Dugoujon Coudray Semino Torroni et al) The mtDNA Legacy of the Levantine Early Upper Palaeolithic in Africa Science 314, 1767 (2006)
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Beyoku once challenged me on the importance of Sardinia. There is a reason why Sardinia is so important to the Eurocentric. I only figured that out recently about 2years when I looked at a map. Sardinia/Italy is just as important as Iberia hence Kefi’s point. I started browsing a few other Foums. And I am not the only one who is now thinking along those lines. I am not as unique as I thought. 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 |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
I wish instead of challenges and vying for debate championship (ego-centered) we could all act more like colleagues -- differing opinion colleagues nonetheless -- working toward a goal of increasing the knowledge of Africa in all its myriad faces calling for clarification and expansion of others' hypotheses though not denying what can be demonstrated as factual.
Remember not even the professionals are in agreement.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
So, I take it you're going to cop out, again? No, I'm not going to answer you tit for tat; that'd make it too easy for you to justify not answering this basic question:
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: How did you bridge the humongous gap in logic from making the observation that the Maghreb component exclusively occurs in the Maghreb, that it can be counted as among that which is "African", other than making gratuitous use of unfortunate labelling (e.g. that the authors called it "Maghreb")?
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: [QB] ... unfortunate labelling (e.g. that the authors called it "Maghreb")?
Wow straight up "Who you gon' believe? Me or your lyin' eyes?" shystering.
Geneticists labeled it African (Maghreb is Africa) but Swenet rejects authors' labels. He knows better than they do. Everyone who doesn't regurgitate Swenet's view is illogical, childish, or unfortunate.
Just imagine the geneticists of the four presented studies are unfortunates too stupid to know how to correctly label their work.
Only Swenet knows the right way.
But Swenet doesn't know the way to just simply do some research using the latest studies' raw data and present it without a priori blinders. Why? Because maybe letting the raw data speak for itself will deflate his dogma preconclusions.
But maybe it won't. We'll just have to wait and see if he's up to the task of doing some work or if he'll just continue his disgruntle ruminations.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Geneticists labeled it African (Maghreb is Africa) but Swenet rejects authors' labels.
Labeling something Maghreb or local component is not labeling it African. For example, while local component like U6 may have first appeared in the Maghreb, it's parent basal haplogroups comes from Europe.
You can see it here for example. U6 is descendant of U, which is descendant of R, which is descendant of N. Same thing for H, J and V haplogroups. All of those genetic mutations first appeared outside Africa in the population that left Africa during the main OOA migration. It's only through a very ancient back migration that U first appeared into the Maghreb.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
* Egypt is not primarily African * Libya is not primarily African * Tunisia is primarily African * S Maroc is primarily African * W Sahara is primarily African * Algeria is primarily African * N Maroc is primarily African.
what haplogroup in particular, according to this method, is most responsible for making Egypt and Libya, primarily Eurasian?
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Geneticists labeled it African (Maghreb is Africa) but Swenet rejects authors' labels. He knows better than they do. Everyone who doesn't regurgitate Swenet's view is illogical, childish, or unfortunate.
Wake up from your stubborn self-induced figments. I've never denied or rejected that Maghreb is in Africa or that the authors labelled this component "Maghreb". You bringing this up is just another one of your cop out ploys. Debating non-contested subject matter will just lead me to ignore your red herrings: you're not throwing sand in my eyes with your deceptions. I'm asking you (~five times already) what evidence is behind your faith-based leap in logic, that the "Maghrebi" component, which your own source describes as:
quote:our hypothesis is that this ancestral population was descendant from the populations that first interbreed with Neandertals about ~37,000–86,000 years ago [18] somewhere in the Middle East.
can be appropriated to your "African" category, with explicit approval from the authors. Wasn't that your whole argument? That "Sanchez-Quinto's genetic report" explicitly supports that "Berbers are primarily African"? But based on what did they say this? By labelling the component using a geographic reference to where this ancestry peaks (i.e. "Maghreb")? Really? Superficial labelling is now going to dictate population affinity rather than the FST analysis of the autosomes themselves? You must be kidding me. This is a whole new low you're stooping to.
For all your admonitions at Kefi's address, you sure are deceptive yourself, no? Deceptively stating X when the main text and the literature actually denies X. For all your admonitions at Bekada's address for appropriating M81 and M78 to Eurasia, you sure are quite fond of appropriating ancestry based on vested interests, yourself. Don't you think enough is enough? Stop your deceptions already, stop lying to the people.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
what haplogroup in particular, according to this method, is most responsible for making Egypt and Libya, primarily Eurasian?
.
Afaik the SNPs are autosomes but Sanchez-Quinto does not really say. Y SNPs may be included. As it is, I know of no way to tell what haplogroups correspond to his k=4 skyline.
What you ask is more of a thing I've noticed Swenet to ferret out. Maybe he has answer for you.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
This is what happens from relying on pretty pictures.
From the same source as your pretty picture
"Haplogroup U is estimated to have originated in the Near East or Southwest Asia around 50,000 years ago,"
FamilyTreeDNA
No wonder no one takes you seriously.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
What? Are you hard of hearing?
I tire of reposting my assessment comes from labels the report authors used when tabulating haplogroup geography and frequency and I really don't give a flying **** whether you like that or not. It prevents the type of bullshit you indulge in.
In any given report's text you can see authors sometime vary about origin lineage or whatever you want to call it. The tables do not display any ambiguity and say precisely what the authors mean. That's why you don't like the table labels. They shut your mouth up before your **** can fall from it, you and all the other 'my way or the hi-way' disgruntled dissenters.
Because of textual ambiguities and ES posters opinions I laid it out from the start to only go by the geneticists categories as themselves given.
I have posted the tables. I did not alter anything to slant toward my view.
What you want to do is slant things to your view by denying the main criteria, autochthone status. You argue from reductio ad absurdum all the while blithely ignoring by your "methodology" all Hgs will eventuall end up African.
Where did N come from? L3, therefore African. Where did R come from? N, therefore African because parent N was shown to be African. Where did U come from? R, therefore African because parent R was shown to be African.
Stop the madness. U is AfroAsian (the Mideast part of Eurasia). But U's subhaplogroups are not all AfroAsian. Some are AfroAsian because of AfroAsian autochthone status. Some are European because of European autochthone status. One is African because of African autochthone status.
I don't know Swenet, you seem to get more irrational with each succeeding post and so far not a one of your posts has expanded our knowledge of the subject.
Deconstruction is easy. Try constructing something. For the life of me I don't know why you don't build your case as I've recommended you do from the start.
1st reply to you Without twisting geographies as laid out by the reports themselves I invite you and anyone else who's capable to present raw data from a variety of legitimate studies that show Berbers are not primarily African. I welcome and await it.
2nd reply to you I invite you to post whatever you want about why the geneticists' assignments are wrong but that won't change their published assessments making them conform to your opinion. It will round out the thread and contribute to its robustness.
3rd reply to you Your options: 1 - More impotent rhetoric; not worth my time to further respond 2 - Pertinent info on the subject header; enlightenment from you we all will appreciate.
So far you take the lazy way out i.e., option 1 - shitting the bull
.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
"Haplogroup U is estimated to have originated in the Near East or Southwest Asia around 50,000 years ago,"
FamilyTreeDNA
No wonder no one takes you seriously. [/QB]
Yuu may have to redo the figures, U6 is therefore primarily Near eastern rather than primarily African
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Per two of my table sources U6 is African. The other one source didn't explicitly say anything about U6 but did say U was Eurasian therefore in that assessment U6 went in the Eurasian bag.
I did not vary from the geneticists labels.
I suggest you write those author and advise them that per FamilyTreeDNA they need to do a redo.
Why do you waver with the wind?
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
Although Tukualr might have some issues with how certain haplogroups are categorized bewteen African and Eurasian,
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: In any given report's text you can see authors sometime vary about origin lineage or whatever you want to call it. The tables do not display any ambiguity and say precisely what the authors mean.
I’m really scratching my head as to why you’d make such patently false statements. Your blinding emotional attachment to the Africanity of Berbers has you reaching for all sorts of shaky ledges. You’ve made quite a few claims in this thread. I know that you know you rationally can’t justify any of them yourself; you’ve lowered your own standards so as to be unbothered by the barrage of faith-based claims that keep appearing in your posts.
As you very well know, the literature has a decade + tradition of simultaneously accepting the autochthonous nature of Maghreb associated mtDNA and their back-flow origin. This tradition goes from Maca-Meyer 2003, all the way to Henn et al 2012, and several works in between (e.g. Rosa et al 2011). Your use of "autochthonous" as somehow necessarily incompatible with backflow, has no merit to it, whatsoever, both per the definition of the word itself, and per what your own sources mean with it. Hence, why I (correctly) diagnosed your scheme as a prime example of circular reasoning; what you're doing is you attempt to prove your own beliefs (Berbers are primarily African) by using your own beliefs (“Maghrebi” in Sanchez-Quinto means ‘independent of backflow’).
No different from a bible thumper who argues with an atheist, saying that God’s vouch for Jesus in Matthew 3:16 is overwhelming evidence that Jesus was a historical person and heaven-sent, not realizing that his opponent would need to accept the bible in the first place, to be susceptible to this circular argument.
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: What you want to do is slant things to your view.
False. As I've stated several times, I'm specifically addressing your misrepresentation of the authors' views. There are plenty of claims for me to disagree with in this thread and I never even once engaged you on any of them. As a matter of fact, I even deleted my own post when it dawned on me that your post wasn't a reaction to mine and I've also posted a source that shows that the Berber speakers may have much more autosomal African ancestry than I initially was willing to accept. Your allegation that I'm in it right now to argue contra "primarily African" or that I argue contra whether or not Sanchez-Quinto used "Maghrebi" to name the component that peaks in Berber speakers are just distractions you keep making up to obfuscate the point of contention, re: your circular argument.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
also in these articles they don't combine mtDNA and Y DNA frequencies and call ithem "uniparental" although it was a good effort
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
There is no such thing as Eurasian lineage!!!! All European lines starts in Africa.
Don't believe me? Check out DNATribes!
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Funny how you can miss things the first time around. I read this yesterday and posted on it on ESR. Looked at it again this morning and got hit by the lightening bolt. The Title of the chart said “Possible route of Basal Eurasian”. I missed that.
What other route is there? Hold your breath, it is coming!! Loving it.
I disagree with DNATribes on the extact location in Africa for the Basal Eurasian AIM. I would put it slightly West of the Great Lakes. Why? Luyha. Their genetic material is more consistent with Basal Eurasian genome. HAPMAP.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic