...
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 » Berbers are primarily not African ? (Page 16)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 17 pages: 1  2  3  ...  13  14  15  16  17   
Author Topic: Berbers are primarily not African ?
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Tukuler   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:

All rhetoric
No raw data.

Take an X-lax pal. You're full of **** with
strawmen running out you mouth like diarrhea
just inventing all kinds of nonsense. You can't
cut and paste any actual words of mine alleging
what you say I said. But when you got no raw
data to support your claim the only thing you
can do against the raw data that was poste is
to smear the poster, debaters dirty trick #1.


All the goobledeegook you can pull
out Felix the Cat's debater's Bag
o' Trix are 4 kidz will not, cannot,
and does not alter the geneticists'
tables i.e.,
* not their geographic labels,
* not their haplogroups,
* not their frequencies.

It's about the raw data not
the textual interpretation
which not only varies from
geneticist to geneticist
but even within a single
report sometimes.

I will believe my lying eyes over
any Slick Rick Shyster everytime.


Now more about the subject header not poster personalities.


U6 Question:
how can an in situ regional specific 30k hg be foreign?

Facts no rhetoric can change:
* U6 founder arose in North Africa and has stayed there > ~30,000 years
* M1 founder arose in North Africa and has stayed there > ~30,000 years
* U6 with minor prehistoric expansion to East Africa.
* M1 with major prehistoric expansion to East Africa.

Proof you're just shitting around:
* you deny E-M81 is East African just because its parent E-M35 is, but
* promote U6 as Eurasian only for the reason its parent U is;
* you champion E-M81 as North African because autochthonous there, yet
* you assail U6 as North African even though autochthonous there.
Who can say "logically irrational"?
Who can say "special pleading"?
Who can say "personal agenda"?

Settle yourself down and quit
lazying outs from my replies

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


Don't be jealous of my work produce work of your own you can do it or maybe you can't.

Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Tukuler   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Reposting for missing caption

= = = = =


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 Arabian
Peninsula 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 | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:

Originally posted by Tukuler:
Take an X-lax pal. You're full of **** with
strawmen running out you mouth like diarrhea
just inventing all kinds of nonsense. You can't
cut and paste any actual words of mine alleging
what you say I said. But when you got no raw
data to support your claim the only thing you
can do against the raw data that was poste is
to smear the poster, debaters dirty trick #1.

Yeah yeah yeah. I see what you’re trying to do.
Trying to drag me down the tit for tat path so
your blatant fabrications go unnoticed. As for the
facts, here they are:

1) You have yet to demonstrate that the Maghrebi
component identified by Sanchez-Quinto et al
is independent of backflow.

2) Your excuse for not having done so by now,
despite me asking for it 5+ times, is because
you say you interpret the authors’ label of this
component (“Maghreb”) as support for your claim
that this component is African, independant of
backflow.

3) You were told that the authors explicitly iden-
tified this entire component as being Near Eastern
in origin, and hence, that your interpretation
that the authors’ use of “Maghrebi” must mean that
they 1) see this component as independent of
backflow and 2) that their view aligns with your
own view that Berbers are primarily African, has
no merit, whatsoever, and is simply a deceptive
fabrication on your part.

4) In response to this damning passage you came
up with a face-saving excuse that supposedly
justifies preferring an ambiguous label over the
authors’ written explanation of that genetic
component’s origin (SMDH). Your excuse is that
authors often provide conflicting accounts on the
origin of ancestry. But this then begs the
question, how you know that your “Magreb means
African” interpretation is the right one out of
the two accounts. How?

5) You were told that the aforementioned excuse
has no merit either, because you’re already aware
of the fact that that is a 10+ year tradition of
considering Maghrebi-specific markers, both
uniparental and autosomal, autochthonous to the
Maghreb while at the same time considering
whoever brought it there, colonists from the Near
East.

6) Your reply to the above is a full-fledged
rant full of empty accusations and fabrications
which, considering the fact that they’re so over
the top and false (e.g. “you deny E-M81 is East
African”), can only be meant to manipulate and
divert attention away from the fact that my
latest post left you with no room for an
on-topic reply, without making some sort of
concession that you've been reaching left and
right, like Bob Dole in mid-air when he fell of
that stage.

Question:
Since the literature routinely identifies
Maghrebi-specific ancestry as both autochthonous
and the result of backflow (e.g. Rosa et al 2011,
Maca-Meyer 2003, Henn et al 2012, etc), how did
you come to the conclusion that Sanchez-Quinto et
al doing the same, somehow indicates that they
voiced support for your claim that this component
can be counted as "African"?

Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  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 
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
Back-migration..Ha! Ha! Ha! Clown!
Don't believe me? Check out DNATribes!
There is no such thing as Eurasian lineage!!!! All European lines starts in Africa

 -  -  -

.

What about Central Asian lines? Do they start in Africa also?

Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Before we move on.
1 . Do you understand that DNATribes chart shows most modem Eurasian genetic material originated in Sahara Africa?
2. Do you agree with it?

We can then discuss East Asia and the so called Denisovan admixture in Africa. And your new job.

This what I was dumbing down to Beyoku about 9months ago. And he still did not get it. I hope you can.

Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
There are a few parts of the puzzle still missing. eg when and how the white European male arrived? And confirmation of the migration route. Tribes have already cast doubt on the Levant by using the word "possible". Meaning they have reservation but they are playing ball for now. They are going with the conventional anthropological/archeological data even though the genetic data shows a different route.

More to come .......

--------------------
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 | Report this post to a Moderator
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944

Icon 12 posted      Profile for Tukuler   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Presenting DNAtribes is no more than presenting
an anonymous bloggers opinion. It has no more
weight and doesn't serve as supportive evidence
like scientific reports and studies with authors'
signatures.

Everybody can do what they want to and I don't
want to stifle contributors but please please
please keep the DNAtribes stuff at a minimum
sidebar please.

Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
hmmmm! I am taken by surprise by that statement. I thought you would be one of the few that understood the relevance of the Tribes post.

Tribes did the same thing as what they did with the Amarnas.

Take published data and plug it into their private database and software and see what comes out. Other software can do the same things

They basically resolved the Berber question with this publication.

They resolved the Henn issue also.

carry on........with pointless circular arguments.

Any questions anyone hit me up. Lioness if you need to discuss start a new thread.

--------------------
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 | 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 
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
Before we move on.
1 . Do you understand that DNATribes chart shows most modem Eurasian genetic material originated in Sahara Africa?
2. Do you agree with it?

We can then discuss East Asia and the so called Denisovan admixture in Africa. And your new job.

This what I was dumbing down to Beyoku about 9months ago. And he still did not get it. I hope you can.

If you had read the DNA chart figre 1 caption above refers to Lazaridis et al's novel concept of "Basal Eurasian" ancestral population
of which DNA Tribes misintreprets

http://www.dnatribes.com/dnatribes-digest-2014-02-01.pdf

^^^ That DNATribes map form here

is supposedly based on the following >>

http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2013/12/23/001552.full.pdf

but they seem to have additional mapping improvisation
excerpts of journa; article on Basal Europeans


Ancient human genomes suggest three ancestral populations for present-day Europeans Dec 2013

Lazaridis, et all

PREPRINT


ABSTRACT

Analysis of ancient DNA can reveal historical events that are difficult to discern through study of present-day individuals. To investigate European population history around the time of the agricultural transition, we sequenced complete genomes from a ~7,500 year old early farmer from the Linearbandkeramik (LBK) culture from Stuttgart in Germany and an ~8,000 year old hunter-gatherer from the Loschbour rock shelter in Luxembourg. We also generated data from seven ~8,000 year old hunter-gatherers from Motala in Sweden. We compared these genomes and published ancient DNA to new data from 2,196 samples from 185 diverse populations to show that at least three ancestral groups contributed to present-day Europeans. The first are Ancient North Eurasians (ANE), who are more closely related to Upper Paleolithic Siberians than to any present-day population. The second are West European Hunter-Gatherers (WHG), related to the Loschbour individual, who contributed to all Europeans but not to Near Easterners. The third are Early European Farmers (EEF), related to the Stuttgart individual, who were mainly of Near Eastern origin but also harbored WHG-related ancestry. We model the deep relationships of these populations and show that about ~44% of the ancestry of EEF derived from a basal Eurasian lineage that split prior to the separation of other non-Africans.


 -
 -

This study raises two questions that are important to address in future research. A first is where the EEF picked up their WHG ancestry. Southeastern Europe is a candidate as it lies along the geographic path from Anatolia into central Europe, and hence it should be a priority to study ancient samples from this region. A second question is when and where ANE ancestors admixed with the ancestors of most present-day Europeans. Based on discontinuity in mtDNA haplogroup frequencies in Central Europe, this may have occurred during the Late Neolithic or early Bronze Age ~5,500-4,000 years ago35. A central aim for future work should be to collect transects of ancient Europeans through time and space to illuminate the history of these transformations.

...

The absence of Y-haplogroup R1b in our two sample locations is striking given that it is, at present, the major west European lineage. Importantly, however, it has not yet been found in ancient European contexts prior to a Bell Beaker burial from Germany (2,800-2,000BC)12, while the related R1a lineage has a first known occurrence in a Corded Ware burial also from Germany (2,600BC)13. This casts doubt on early suggestions associating these haplogroups with Paleolithic Europeans14, and is more consistent with their Neolithic entry into Europe at least in the case of R1b15, 16. More research is needed to document the time and place of their earliest occurrence in Europe. Interestingly, the Mal’ta boy belonged to haplogroup R* and we tentatively suggest that some haplogroup R bearers may be responsible for the wider dissemination of Ancient North Eurasian ancestry into Europe, as their haplogroup Q relatives may have plausibly done into the Americas17.

(SI12)While our three-way mixture model fits the data for most European populations, two sets of populations are poor fits. First, Sicilians, Maltese, and Ashkenazi Jews have EEF estimates beyond the 0-100% interval (SI13) and they cannot be jointly fit with other Europeans (SI12). These populations may have more Near Eastern ancestry than can be explained via EEF admixture (SI13), an inference that is also suggested by the fact that they fall in the gap between European and Near Eastern populations in the PCA of Fig. 1B. Second, we observe that Finns, Mordovians, Russians, Chuvash, and Saami from northeastern Europe do not fit our model (SI12; Extended Data Table 3). To better understand this, for each West Eurasian population in turn we plotted f4(X, Bedouin2; Han, Mbuti) against f4(X, Bedouin2; MA1, Mbuti), using statistics that measure the degree of a European population’s allele sharing with Han Chinese or MA1 (Extended Data Fig. 7). Europeans fall along a line of slope >1 in the plot of these two statistics. However, northeastern Europeans fall away from this line in the direction of Han. This is consistent with Siberian gene flow into some northeastern Europeans after the initial ANE admixture, and may be related to the fact that Y-chromosome haplogroup N 30, 31 is shared between Siberian and northeastern Europeans32, 33 but not with western Europeans. There may in fact be multiple layers of Siberian gene flow into northeastern Europe after the initial ANE gene flow, as our analyses reported in SI 12 show that some Mordovians, Russians and Chuvash have Siberian-related admixture that is significantly more recent than that in Finns.


_____________________________________________


when people left Africa they were all Africans.

You take this to mean therfore all haplogroups formed in Africa.
That is silliness.

Some people in the world are not Africans.
But if you follow their ancestry far back enough they Africans

this is what you trip on

It doesn't mean every haplpgroup therefore originated in Africa because their oldest human ancestors were African.

quote from the peer reviewed source article, not the DNA Tribes the private persoanl testing company map>

"We model the deep relationships of these populations and show that about ~44% of the ancestry of EEF derived from a basal Eurasian lineage that split prior to the separation of other non-Africans."


________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

 -


^^^ Note how in this DNA Tribes has Basal Eurasian in Egypt and their ancestor marked "non-African" somehwere in the horn or Ethiopia
and they claim this is based on Lazaridis' article
-but their interpretation is screwy and stretches wrongly

-lioness productions

Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
That's your attempt at a critique ??? [Roll Eyes]

I am wasting my time.

Back-migration???????????????

Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007  |  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 
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
That's your attempt at a critique ??? [Roll Eyes]

I am wasting my time.

Back-migration???????????????

I'm wasting my time, you never looked into the reference in the caption or origininal article they claimed to base the map on.

If you look at the first humans in Africa they were one haplogroup. Then some of them migrated to other places in Africa and different haplogroups of Africans within Africa evolved.

Then people left Africa and have been out of Africa for tens of thousands of years and other haplogroups evolved outside of Africa

but because you are the most dogmatic
person on Egypt search you say this is impossible

But it is not impossible.

And once a haplogroup evolves outside of Africa also think it is impossible for some of the people carrying such haplogroups to come back into Africa.

You say this never happened because you have a dogmatic irrational view that back migration cannot occur

That is why you are a waste of time

Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Oh! OK! Huh! huh!

I don't argue hypotheticals

--------------------
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 | 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 
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
Oh! OK! Huh! huh!

I don't argue hypotheticals

your idea that all haplogroups originated in Africa IS hypothetical
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Tukuler   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I consider "back migration" as a back-to-Africa
movement or African coalescence of a basal clade
belonging to a haplogroup that itself arose from
outside of continental Africa.

There are several haplogroups representative of
"back migration." They either arose in Africa or
en route to Africa. They either appear only in
Africa, have their highest frequencies there,
or can be shown to have expanded subclades
within Africa or to outside of Africa.

In general they are African specific and are not
counted as Eurasian "lineages" though they have
Eurasian parentage (origin) -- the same as L3M &
L3N are not counted as African "lineages" though
they, M & N, have African parentage (L3 origin).

This distinction is what separates a haplogroup
like R-V88 from J-M267. The former is African
specific and ranked with African "lineages"
whereas the latter, though found in Africa,
is Afroasian specific and is an Eurasian
"lineage."

Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Member Rated:
4
Icon 10 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
Question:
Since the literature routinely identifies
Maghrebi-specific ancestry as both autochthonous
and the result of backflow (e.g. Rosa et al 2011,
Maca-Meyer 2003, Henn et al 2012, etc), how did
you come to the conclusion that Sanchez-Quinto et
al doing the same, somehow indicates that they
voiced support for your claim that this component
can be counted as "African"?

No reply? I'll take that, too. Great. More than
great [Wink] Since most of the remaining posters are
nepotist yes-men and/or eager to buy into
everything if it strokes their fantasies, I was
in it to give readers a way to sort out the
facts, themselves. And that's exactly what they
got. So, given your eagerness to create a 10+
page thread trying to correct others, but your
refusal to answer for your falsehoods under the
pretence that you "wish instead of challenges and
vying for debate championship (ego-centered) we
could all act more like colleagues" I'll let
everyone make up their mind regarding whether
they think you've been copping out as much as I
think you've been. Given your evasive behaviour,
again and again and again in response to my basic
question regarding your patchy logic, now
everyone can now make up their own mind regarding
whether or not they find the following passages
out of your posts as much epitomes of broken
logic and blatant self-serving fabrication as I
do:

quote:
Originally posted by Tukuler:
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.

So therefore, I can just recklessly manipulate
Sanchez-Quinto labelling convention (i.e. Sanchez-
Quinto named this component "Maghreb" due to
frequency considerations), and blurt out:

quote:
Originally posted by Tukuler:
But when all the data from from 6 different
sources is "pooled" Berbers are primarily
African.


Very sophisticated reasoning. [Wink]
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
@ Lioness


Tribes is trying to identify the origin of the "basal Eurasian". 'Basal' being the last/recent that left Africa. WHG/ANE left with the original OOA migration. Basal/EEF are Neolithics.

From Tribes

======

Within Africa, these innovations were integrated into the Pre-Dynastic cultures of Egypt (such as Naqada) and Nubia (further south along the Nile River). This included the emergence of a DISTINCTIVE AFRICAN CATTLE CULTURE attested in the Laas Gaal rock carvings (dated to between 9,000 – 3,000 BCE). As the climate changed and Africa’s “Green Sahara” became a desert, the fertile Nile Valley emerged as an important population and civilization center linking the East Mediterranean with the interior of East Africa, continuing the cycle of contacts that generated the first Out of Africa migrations.

Although the model of human population history described in Lazaridis4 does NOT identify a geographical location where Basal Eurasian populations developed(ORIGIN), the paper’s tree model suggests an origin after an initial split from African moderns and prior to the divergence of Eastern Non-African


Read more: http://egyptsearchreloaded.proboards.com/thread/1595/dnatribes-right-african-origins-europeans#ixzz2w7WHqm9X

--------------------
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 | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
To move things along. To those who haven't connected the dots as yet.

WHG/ANE are black skinned as attested to by recent aDNA reports. eg La Brana, Loschbour, ancient Siberian populations. Stuttgart introduced the light pigmentation gene. She was brown and carried the same diversity for skin pigmentation as YRI.

WHG/ANE and Melanese has the same skin profile showing the initially wave was blsck skin. they remain black when they enetred Europe up to 6000BC. Now I see why East asian has a different pigmentation profile for light skin cf to Europeans. Why? East Asians git there profile from the first wave. Europeans got the profile from the 2nd wave..and it was recent.

Remember Lazadaris did NOT specify the origin of EEF. They used YRI as a proxy. they concluded that San were NOT a good proxy.

Again it makes sense. The San light skin profile is unlike YRI.

So, Shriver was correct that AMH left with ability for light skin. And eye color and skin pigmentation is unrelated. he was off with the timing.

It is all falling in place..

--------------------
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 | 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 
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
@ Lioness


Tribes is trying to identify the origin of the "basal Eurasian". 'Basal' being the last/recent that left Africa. WHG/ANE left with the original OOA migration. Basal/EEF are Neolithics.

From Tribes

======

Within Africa, these innovations were integrated into the Pre-Dynastic cultures of Egypt (such as Naqada) and Nubia (further south along the Nile River). This included the emergence of a DISTINCTIVE AFRICAN CATTLE CULTURE attested in the Laas Gaal rock carvings (dated to between 9,000 – 3,000 BCE). As the climate changed and Africa’s “Green Sahara” became a desert, the fertile Nile Valley emerged as an important population and civilization center linking the East Mediterranean with the interior of East Africa, continuing the cycle of contacts that generated the first Out of Africa migrations.

Although the model of human population history described in Lazaridis4 does NOT identify a geographical location where Basal Eurasian populations developed(ORIGIN), the paper’s tree model suggests an origin after an initial split from African moderns and prior to the divergence of Eastern Non-African


Read more: http://egyptsearchreloaded.proboards.com/thread/1595/dnatribes-right-african-origins-europeans#ixzz2w7WHqm9X

And because they have labeled the last/recent that left Africa you assume that this group left and already were carrying the particular haplogroups identified as European, that no haplogroup could have evolved after this settled into Eurasia.
That is what you assume over and over again and it's irrational

Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  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 
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
To move things along. To those who haven't connected the dots as yet.

WHG/ANE are black skinned as attested to by recent aDNA reports. eg La Brana, Loschbour, ancient Siberian populations. Stuttgart introduced the light pigmentation gene. She was brown and carried the same diversity for skin pigmentation as YRI.

WHG/ANE and Melanese has the same skin profile showing the initially wave was blsck skin. they remain black when they enetred Europe up to 6000BC. Now I see why East asian has a different pigmentation profile for light skin cf to Europeans. Why? East Asians git there profile from the first wave. Europeans got the profile from the 2nd wave..and it was recent.

Remember Lazadaris did NOT specify the origin of EEF. They used YRI as a proxy. they concluded that San were NOT a good proxy.

Again it makes sense. The San light skin profile is unlike YRI.

So, Shriver was correct that AMH left with ability for light skin. And eye color and skin pigmentation is unrelated. he was off with the timing.

It is all falling in place..

what is falling into place is near to conventional theory but on a shorter time frame but has been discussed for the past seven years

namely that darker skinned people, in prehistoric times before civilization, began to depigment and over several thousands years went from brown skinned and blue eyed
to the paler skin of today.

La Brana for instance, is 7000 years old. (not 4000, the figure you keep putting out)
 -
La Brana skull


This falls into the time frame of the below article, already much discussed, from seven years ago by Ann Gibbons

http://galsatia.files.wordpress.com/2007/04/blanche_paleur.pdf

Science 20 April 2007:
Vol. 316 no. 5823 p. 364
DOI: 10.1126/science.316.5823.364a
NEWS FOCUS
AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGISTS MEETING

European Skin Turned Pale Only Recently, Gene Suggests
Ann Gibbons
PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA-- At the American Association of Physical Anthropologists meeting, held here from 28 to 31 March, a new report on the evolution of a gene for skin color suggested that Europeans acquired pale skin quite recently, perhaps only 6000 to 12,000 years ago.

_______________________________________


this means Eurasians stole everything they know form black people right? All the knowledge

No,

it means they ARE
formerly black people (FB)

This is why modern Europeans should be more respectful of black people because they were them not long ago, the ancestors

_________________________________________________________

The mitochondria of both individuals are assigned to U5b2c1, a haplotype common among the small number of other previously studied Mesolithic individuals from Northern and Central Europe. This suggests a remarkable genetic uniformity and little phylogeographic structure over a large geographic area of the pre-Neolithic populations.
[...]
The generated data covered 41,320,020 nucleotide positions for La Braña 1 and 16,876,146 for La Braña 2; thus, about 1.34% and 0.53% of the La Braña 1 and 2 genomes were retrieved, respectively [...]
A worldwide genomic principal component analysis (PCA) with data from the 1000 Genomes Project places La Braña 1 and 2 near, but not within the variation of current European populations (Figure S2). However, when compared exclusively to European populations, La Braña 1 and 2 fall closer to Northern European populations such as CEU and Great Britons than Southern European groups such as Iberians or Tuscans (Sánchez-Quinto et al., 2012)

________________________________________

^^^ xyyman, Sardinians out the window

It doesn't matter though.

This is the irrational idea that's going through your head subconsciously>
>> Black people coming directly from Africa settled Europe 4000 years ago carrying all the hapologroups found there today
It can still fit into the biblical timeline

Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Tukuler   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
If you look at your recently posted DNAtribes
map you'll notice it differs not from Wiedner's
map's Caucasian lines.

 -
 -

DNAtribes posits Caucasian Europeans sprang up
in NE Afr spread to N Afr and to Eur.

At least Wiedner allowed for his negro to reach
N Afr.


From old school anthropology to today's molecular
biology Euros have not given up on claiming N Afr
for Caucasians as best emplified in Maca-Meyer 2003 with her >30,000 year old Caucasians.

Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
@ Lioness. You are still don't get the whole picture. I know, I know, short retention and attention span.

Sardinian is IN play. Also NW Africa. Tribes used the word "possible" migration. They are leaving room for modification. By the end of the year...they will agree with me as they have done so far.

The only scenario that makes sense is through Iberia and Sardinia. The Nile River Valley was dominated by SSA. Up to today the genetic profile consistently supports that. Female hg_H is virtually absent in the Nile Valley. SSA lineages are dominant. That is why I would put Tribes "basal" more to the South and further West. remember the Luhya and Massai seem ancestral to the Amazigh. Masai are ancestral to indigenous Egyptians.

quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
Which is the true Berber? I getting good at recognizing an amazigh. Easiest detail is in the Brow height and cheek width.


Amazigh

 -

 -

Turk Berber Imposter

 -


Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
more Berbers. Irregardless of skin tone. One can see they are the same ethnic group.

 -

Amazigh. Not an Ottoman Turk. Note facial structure

Read more: http://egyptsearchreloaded.proboards.com/thread/1405/african-berbers-pictures?page=4#ixzz2w9eexmsS

Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Sage you are Sahelian. This should be obvious to you.

--------------------
Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming

Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged | 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 
and when you put up pictures with no source links or even country of origin
all of the sudden it's not "picture spam" as you like to complain about
???

Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  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 
quote:
Originally posted by Tukuler:


DNAtribes posits Caucasian Europeans sprang up
in NE Afr spread to N Afr and to Eur.


xyyman had claimed the same thing,

However in the aforementioned
DNATribes article the word "Caucasian"
doesn't appear, I just checked


However if they did it wouldn't matter if Caucasians don't exist?
How could something spring up if it doesn't exist?

Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  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 
quote:
Originally posted by Tukuler:


* 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.


^^^ I'm trying to figure out how to plug this in to the U.S. census form


 -


^^^ Like for Algeria, Tunisia, etc, being the they are supposedly primarily African do you check "Black" in the box ??


Typical Primarily African Algerians
 -

Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Tukuler   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
According to the USA census all peoples of N Afr
and the "Mid-East" are supposed to check white
Caucasian no matter their colour or phenotype.

As far as your pic spam do you have a STRUCTURE
or ADMIXTURE skyline of those particular guys?
Withou it it it's impossible to tell what those
individuals are as far percentages of their
DNA heritage.

Mind you that, proven primarily African via their
uniparentals and autosomes, Berbers are heavily
admixed with non-Africans. That means individual
Berbers may be either primarily African or primarily
non-African genetically though as an aggregate
whole the DNA evidence I posted proves Berbers
and Maghrebis in general are primarily African,
local African.

Berbers and Maghrebis in general per phenotype
are best described as what JA Rogers called a
"fixed mulatto" people. That's why they show up
in forensic databases as a mixed population like
Arabs and Latin Americas.

 -  -

Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011  |  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 
quote:
Originally posted by Tukuler:
According to the USA census all peoples of N Afr
and the "Mid-East" are supposed to check white
Caucasian no matter their colour or phenotype.


I have never heard that before. Do you have a source applicable to recent US census (not from 20 years ago) that says the US census says that North Africans are supposed to check White ??
I find it hard to believe,

also the Cencus uses the term "White" currently not "White Caucasian"

Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  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 
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
Sage you are Sahelian. This should be obvious to you.

crickets
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  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 
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
[QB] more Berbers. Irregardless of skin tone. One can see they are the same ethnic group.


no one can't see that, the other women look different
also

Also please don't use the word "irregardless"


irregardless
an erroneous word that, etymologically, means the opposite of what it is used to express. Attested in non-standard writing from at least 1870s (e.g. "Portsmouth Times," Portsmouth, Ohio, U.S.A., April 11, 1874: "We supported the six successful candidates for Council in the face of a strong opposition. We were led to do so because we believed every man of them would do his whole duty, irregardless of party, and the columns of this paper for one year has [sic] told what is needed."); probably a blend of irrespective and regardless. Perhaps inspired by the colloquial use of the double negative as an emphatic.

^^^ It's double negative to put "irr"
next to "regardless"

"irr" means "not" as in "irrational"


 -


print out this picture

show it to your friends

ask them to guess where she's from


then get back to me

Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Tukuler   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
Sage you are Sahelian. This should be obvious to you.

I already gave up the facial bone structure of
pristine Imazighen. And they are not the only
ones that have something like that same shape.

But then you are familiar with Sergi, no?

Thing is I don't contemporary Imazighen or even
Arabo-Berbers who deny obviously recent < 1k
admixed co-citizens of N Afr are not "Berber"
if they display "Berber" ethnic sensibilities
or belong to a "Berber tribe" an AHEL AIT or OULD.

Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011  |  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 
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:

Cacausoids were always in Africa. ...Europeans entered Africa relatively recently.

.
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:

I maintain that kinky hair is a recent adaptation


.

Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Tukuler   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:
Originally posted by Tukuler:

According to the USA census all peoples of N Afr
and the "Mid-East" are supposed to check white
Caucasian no matter their colour or phenotype.


I have never heard that before. Do you have a source applicable to recent US census (not from 20 years ago) that says the US census says that North Africans are supposed to check White ??
I find it hard to believe,

also the Cencus uses the term "White" currently not "White Caucasian"

.


Like Swenet you really won't care what the sources say vs your own dogmatic personal opinion but here http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_RHI125212.htm


Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011  |  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 
 -

quote:
Originally posted by Tukuler:
Like Swenet you really won't care what the source say vs your own personal opinion but here http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_RHI125212.htm

  • White. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa. It includes people who indicate their race as "White" or report entries such as Irish, German, Italian, Lebanese, Arab, Moroccan, or Caucasian.



quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:
Originally posted by Tukuler:
According to the USA census all peoples of N Afr
and the "Mid-East" are supposed to check white
Caucasian no matter their colour or phenotype.


I have never heard that before. Do you have a source applicable to recent US census (not from 20 years ago) that says the US census says that North Africans are supposed to check White ??
I find it hard to believe,

also the Cencus uses the term "White" currently not "White Caucasian"


I don't know if I recall the Census including this fact sheet in the packet.
The quote says
" It includes people who indicate their race as "White"
They indicate that by choice
and people that indicate that for themselves might be North African


quote:

Black or African American. A person having origins in any of the Black racial groups of Africa. It includes people who indicate their race as "Black, African Am., or Negro"; or report entries such as African American, Kenyan, Nigerian, or Haitian.

^^^ this doesn't say excluding North Africans

I don;t think this fact sheet is in the packet or that it necessarily says North Africans are supposed to check White

The Census is self identified currently
A Black Moroccan is not likely to check "White"
They will check Black and there will not be a problem

However a 'mulatto' person hesitate with the above census section. There is no "pardo" category aka brwon in Spanish as there is on the Brazil census

One could argue that the categories "White" and "Black" be eliminated from the census

---Although at the bottom of the section "Some Other Race" you can skip all the categories and write in whatever you want

Notice they have "Black" and "White" but don't have "Asian" as a race.
They could have said "African", " European" , Asian"
or "Black" "Yellow""White"

The whole thing is confused and inconsistent

then why did you bring it up lioness?

--for rhetorical purposes

or also to suggest maybe do away with that whole section


Lp

Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  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 
quote:
Originally posted by Tukuler:


Berbers being genetically primarily African
has absolutely no Pan-African significance
whatsoever.


why not?

If they could be convinced with this data of their primary Africaness and be proud of it maybe they could join in?

Didn't Gaddafi talk about Pan-African unity and try to set up a new currency ?

Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Exactly. Now you are getting it. As you can see I am being proven right. Caucasians have always been in Africa, But Europeans have not. and I maintain Kinky hair is a recent adaptation.

Modern Europeans are an admixture of several waves of Africans. And it is not as Sforza? stated. 2/3 asian etc. Southern Europeans may be 2/3 EEF/African and 1/3 WHG/ANE while Northen Europeans may be the reverse.

I hope you understand now.

R-M269 still have me puzzled.


Oh! I case you haven't notice I prefer to use my own words. I think it is more effective communication. eg irregardless, Europhile, sperming etc.


What do you think Sweetness, you are the communications major.
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:

Cacausoids were always in Africa. ...Europeans entered Africa relatively recently.

.
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:

I maintain that kinky hair is a recent adaptation


.


Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007  |  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 
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
Exactly. Now you are getting it. As you can see I am being proven right. Caucasians have always been in Africa, But Europeans have not. and I maintain Kinky hair is a recent adaptation.

Modern Europeans are an admixture of several waves of Africans. And it is not as Sforza? stated. 2/3 asian etc. Southern Europeans may be 2/3 EEF/African and 1/3 WHG/ANE while Northen Europeans may be the reverse.

I hope you understand now.

R-M269 still have me puzzled.


Oh! I case you haven't notice I prefer to use my own words. I think it is more effective communication. eg irregardless, Europhile, sperming etc.



 -

excerpt from

AN ANTAGONIST'S PERSPECTIVE
by C. Loring Brace

Does Race Exist?
Posted 02.15.00NOVA

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/evolution/does-race-exist.html

Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944

Icon 5 posted      Profile for Tukuler   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
See, just as predicted.

Give you what you asked for
a gov doc equating white with n afr

and you don't care

you go into flim flam mode
believe me and my line of ****
not the lying current gov doc.

At least Clyde didn't deny there is a word taMaSHeQ
though he blind eyedly denies its the dialectical
equivalent of taMaZiGHt, no matter he often
presents wordlists with less obvious ties.


Is this it now?
Is this where ES is at?
Personal preference
regardless of
valid documentation.

Is it worth the time and effort
to research and post the findings
just for lurkers who never reply
or future surfers GOOGLing around?


quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
 -

quote:
Originally posted by Tukuler:
Like Swenet you really won't care what the source say vs your own personal opinion but here http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_RHI125212.htm

  • White. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa. It includes people who indicate their race as "White" or report entries such as Irish, German, Italian, Lebanese, Arab, Moroccan, or Caucasian.



quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:
Originally posted by Tukuler:
According to the USA census all peoples of N Afr
and the "Mid-East" are supposed to check white
Caucasian no matter their colour or phenotype.


I have never heard that before. Do you have a source applicable to recent US census (not from 20 years ago) that says the US census says that North Africans are supposed to check White ??
I find it hard to believe,

also the Cencus uses the term "White" currently not "White Caucasian"


I don't know if I recall the Census including this fact sheet in the packet.
The quote says
" It includes people who indicate their race as "White"
They indicate that by choice
and people that indicate that for themselves might be North African


quote:

Black or African American. A person having origins in any of the Black racial groups of Africa. It includes people who indicate their race as "Black, African Am., or Negro"; or report entries such as African American, Kenyan, Nigerian, or Haitian.

^^^ this doesn't say excluding North Africans

I don;t think this fact sheet is in the packet or that it necessarily says North Africans are supposed to check White

The Census is self identified currently
A Black Moroccan is not likely to check "White"
They will check Black and there will not be a problem

However a 'mulatto' person hesitate with the above census section. There is no "pardo" category aka brwon in Spanish as there is on the Brazil census

One could argue that the categories "White" and "Black" be eliminated from the census

---Although at the bottom of the section "Some Other Race" you can skip all the categories and write in whatever you want

Notice they have "Black" and "White" but don't have "Asian" as a race.
They could have said "African", " European" , Asian"
or "Black" "Yellow""White"

The whole thing is confused and inconsistent

then why did you bring it up lioness?

--for rhetorical purposes

or also to suggest maybe do away with that whole section


Lp


Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Tukuler:
Like Swenet you really won't care what the sources
say (..)

Passive aggressive thrash talking, huh? Please go on
with your thread and don't involve me. Thanks.

Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Tukuler   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Not to dragged into personal dialog
with someone who can't present an
on topic case with supporting data

but

I'll do whatever I damn well please
including invoking your name whenever
I feel like it. At least I don't raise
strawmen and attribute them to you as
you have no qualms in doing to me and
even with that I still mopped the floor
with you.

Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Never said you don't reserve your right to troll and
lie freely.

Look, I don't intend to back and forth with you on
this or read your corny comments on what happened
days ago. You either comply with my request or you
don't; it's *that* simple. There was no need for
you to come out of hiding and reply to what I'm
saying.

Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  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 
 -

quote:
Originally posted by Tukuler:
See, just as predicted.

Give you what you asked for
a gov doc equating white with n afr

and you don't care

you go into flim flam mode
believe me and my line of ****
not the lying current gov doc.


what prediction?

quote:

U.S. Census QuickFacts

White. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa. It includes people who indicate their race as "White" or report entries such as Irish, German, Italian, Lebanese, Arab, Moroccan, or Caucasian.

Black or African American. A person having origins in any of the Black racial groups of Africa. It includes people who indicate their race as "Black, African Am., or Negro"; or report entries such as African American, Kenyan, Nigerian, or Haitian.


^^^^ you take this to mean

this>>>

quote:
Originally posted by Tukular

According to the USA census all peoples of N Afr
and the "Mid-East" are supposed to check white
Caucasian no matter their colour or phenotype.


This statement is after the fact categorization when a person such as a Moroccan intentionally does not check
"White" or
"Black"
or both "White" and "Black"
or mutiple "race" categories

BUT instead at the bottom of the "race" section they write at the bottom of the form " Moroccan" ( or some other NA country)
then the US gov assumes the person is White when it comes to compiling statistical information which is later used in race based policies.

I'm not saying it's right but it misleading to say they are telling people to do something.
The statement is not even on the Census itself.
The Census tells you what to do-pick one or more of any of the categories or write in what you want.
It does not show on the form 'White' and have any definition or country listed after it
-nor does the fact sheet say anything about "how to fill in section 6. on the US census"

It is an online fact sheet which tells you how they will categorize somebody who writes in their own option


" White...includes people who....report entries such as... Lebanese, Arab, Moroccan,

If a Black Moroccan American chooses "Black" they will be counted as Black.

Should they assume a Moroccan unspecified is White? No
They shouldn't assume anything

Some "race" based policies could be affected by the data

Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Can you grasp the significance of this? (play Jeopardy Song). So how long have the Amazigh been in Africa? Back migration my……

From the paper cited by TP.

Quote(Cruciani)
=====
Four subjects (two Berbers from northwest Africa, one Tuareg and one Fulbe from Niger) were confirmed as belonging to clade A1a.24,29 It is worth noting that this clade was previously detected in west Africa, although at low frequencies.10,30–32 Three chromosomes from the Bakola pygmy group from southern Cameroon (central Africa) were found to carry the derived allele at V164, V166, V196, and P114 and were classified as A1b. Interestingly, one chromosome from an Algerian Berber group (northwest Africa) was found to carry the derived allele at V164, V166, and V196 but carried the ancestral one at P114, implying a bipartite structure for A1b, where P114 defines an internal node.


Clearly, calculation of the precise age of the tree largely depends on the accuracy of the ASSUMED mutation rate. In any case, an antiquity of the root greater than that previously estimated is evident from the present tree structure. It is worth noting that A1b, long neglected in previous large-scale resequencing studies of the MSY, contributes to the older TMRCA and high nucleotide diversity values that we observe, highlighting the importance of targeted studies on rare haplogroups. Third, contrary to previous phylogeny-based conclusions, 15,16 the deepest clades of the revised MSYphylogeny are currently found in central and northwest Africa. MSY lineages from these regions coalesce at an older time (142 KY) than do those from east and south Africa (105 KY), opening new perspectives concerning early modern human evolution. A scenario of a Y chromosome ‘‘Adam’’ living in central-northwest Africa about 140 KY ago would provide a good fit to the present data.

=======


As I said. More to come. Unlike DNATribes I woukd put the “basal Eurasia” gene pool not along the Nile but further South and West.

--------------------
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 | Report this post to a Moderator
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944

Icon 12 posted      Profile for Tukuler   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Bottomline about the USA census.
As I stated, it sees North Africans
regardless of colour as white aka
Caucasian people.

All your todo is hoopla that can't
alter the facts as you the Lyin'Ass,
Grandstand Dan Swenet, and Flimflam
Sam ARtU are apt at attempting but
always failing to fulfill.

Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Tukuler   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Note DNAtribes classed its "basal
Eurasian" (whatever that's supposed
to be) as non-African even though
its origin is Sudan and it expands
northward via the Gulf of Aqaba
from Sudan to the Levant's Rift
and westward from Sudan to
Libya and the Maghreb.

This is not at all what Sergi proposed.

DNAtribes is nothing to write home about
unless one thinks beginnings of Sudanis,
Egyptians, Libyans, and Maghrebis are
non-African but rather "basal Eurasian."


Imazighen, by definition, can only
have been in Africa since the time
there was such a language family
as Tamazight.

Some definitive components of Imazighen,
which are autochthonous thus indigenous
in North Africa, can be traced back to the
Paleolithic with continuity up to today.
Two are mtDNA haplogroups U6 & M1.

L3K while not arising in the Maghreb has
been there for some 25-30k pending which
molecular biologist one references.

Consider: autochthonous U6 & M1 birthed
in North Africa, with U6 found only in Africa
until quite recent times, predates many other
haplogroups that also arose in Africa.

U6, African specific, is indigenous and
just as old if not much older than most
other African haplogroups.

Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Finally an intelligent discourse. We should take this to ESR.

Anyways. We are getting bog down with the label “basal Eurasian”. If it is was spawn in Africa…it is African. That is the bottom-line. We have to get pass the label Eurasian. Remember there is no race….or back-migration.

Agreed, DTribes is nothing to write home about but they attacked the problem I was having when I read the Loschbour/Stuttgart report. The report did not specify WHERE the EEF/Basal Eurasian material developed/originated. Here DTribes is attempting to verify the basal Eurasian source. The Loschbour report used the Negev Bedoiuns as a “jump off’ point in the “Middle East”. But the report went further and stated the source had strong genetic links to YRI. Remember the report used HGDP unlike DTribes. The report ruled out the San groups.

DTribes then use their database and software (albeit private) to narrow down the location. Just as with the Amarnas. Regardless, the basal Eurasian source seems to be between YRI and the Bediouns of Negev.

Anyone who read and understood Henn’s back-migration paper will see a similar theme. Strong genetic link between the Qataris and North Africans. The Loschbour report now confirms it was Africans migrating Out to Asia. DTribes sates “ Sudan to Maghreb to Arabia”

As for Sergi – I can provide citation…for you…but IIRC Sergi hypothesis was very similar. Although not exactly the same. Sergi suggestion was the Eurafricans originated also close to Sudan. They migrated throughout lower Europe and Asia. Bringing their Neolithic technology. Persians, Phoenicians, Nuragic, Iberians etc were all EurAfricans. He differed by suggesting a different population eventually replaced the technologically advanced Neolithic. He was right in that there were two populations and the Eurafricans brought the technology to lower Europe. aDNA is now showing the Eurafricans(basal Europe) probably met the older population in Europe. And not the other way around as Sergi suggested. If you read the Loschbour report in states that EEF/Basal has high frequency at 3 locations in lower Europe. And in the North the frequency is very low. That is why we should not get caught with the label “basal”.

The three points of high frequency in Europe are Iberia, Italy/Sardinia and Greece. Oh, and the Jewish populations in Europe also have relatively high frequency. All pints are closest to Africa with exactly the same frequency. That is why I am convinced the route was NOT through the Negev.

Relevance to Berber and thread? That basal Eurasian is the Amazigh, their origin?, The East Africa(Sudan area) as attested to by numerous genetic reports. M1 Kivilsid et al, nrY-E Eanafaa ? et al. etc.

I am open to counter claims.

--------------------
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 | Report this post to a Moderator
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Tukuler   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
 -

 -

You can find actual reports or studies
authored by geneticists to source what
ever it is you mean by adopting DNAtribes
basal Eurasian nomenclature which for them
is clearly non-African.

Sergi proposed an EurAFRICAN group that
excluded EurASIANS. For Sergi, the two
had separate genesis or cranial defining
characteristics.

Anyway, don't we already know Eurasian
genetics started in Africa with mtDNA
L3 and nrY Chromosomes DE and F.

Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
As I have stated before, a recent migration towards Europe. Whether the author claims some of the "non-scrutiny basal's" as none-African is irrelevant. Since some of these famous acclaimed genetic sequences of basal's arose in Africa anyway. Fact for this matter is seen in nuclear resolutions.


quote:
Analysis of ancient DNA can reveal historical events that are difficult to discern through study of present-day individuals. To investigate European population history around the time of the agricultural transition, we sequenced complete genomes from a ~7,500 year old early farmer from the Linearbandkeramik (LBK) culture from Stuttgart in Germany and an ~8,000 year old hunter-gatherer from the Loschbour rock shelter in Luxembourg. We also generated data from seven ~8,000 year old hunter-gatherers from Motala in Sweden. We compared these genomes and published ancient DNA to new data from 2,196 samples from 185 diverse populations to show that at least three ancestral groups contributed to present-day Europeans. The first are Ancient North Eurasians (ANE), who are more closely related to Upper Paleolithic Siberians than to any present-day population. The second are West European Hunter-Gatherers (WHG), related to the Loschbour individual, who contributed to all Europeans but not to Near Easterners. The third are Early European Farmers (EEF), related to the Stuttgart individual, who were mainly of Near Eastern origin but also harbored WHG-related ancestry. We model the deep relationships of these populations and show that about ~44% of the ancestry of EEF derived from a basal Eurasian lineage that split prior to the separation of other non-Africans.


[...]


Stuttgart belonged to mtDNA haplogroup T2, typical of Neolithic Europeans10, while Loschbour and all Motala individuals belonged to haplogroups U5 and U2, typical of pre-agricultural Europeans1, 8 (SI4).


[...]


The successful model (Fig. 2A) also suggests 44 ± 10% “Basal Eurasian” admixture into the ancestors of Stuttgart: gene flow into their Near Eastern ancestors from a lineage that diverged prior to the separation of the ancestors of Loschbour and Onge.


Such a scenario, while never suggested previously, is plausible given the early presence of modern humans in the Levant25, African-related tools made by modern humans in Arabia26, 27, and the geographic opportunity for continuous gene flow between the Near East and Africa28.

[...]


Based on discontinuity in mtDNA haplogroup frequencies in Central Europe, this may have occurred during the Late Neolithic or early Bronze Age ~5,500-4,000 years ago35. A central aim for future work should be to collect transects of ancient Europeans through time and space to illuminate the history of these transformations.



http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2013/12/23/001552.full.pdf


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


[Roll Eyes] [Big Grin]

Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
 -


 -
 -

Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Cattle pastoralism is an important trait of African cultures. Ethnographic studies describe the central role played by domestic cattle within many societies, highlighting its social and ideological value well beyond its mere function as ‘walking larder’. Historical depth of this African legacy has been repeatedly assessed in an archaeological perspective, mostly emphasizing a continental vision. Nevertheless, in-depth site-specific studies, with a few exceptions, are lacking. Despite the long tradition of a multi-disciplinary approach to the analysis of pastoral systems in Africa, rarely do early and middle Holocene archaeological contexts feature in the same area the combination of settlement, ceremonial and rock art features so as to be multi-dimensionally explored: the Messak plateau in the Libyan central Sahara represents an outstanding exception. Known for its rich Pleistocene occupation and abundant Holocene rock art, the region, through our research, has also shown to preserve the material evidence of a complex ritual dated to the Middle Pastoral (6080–5120 BP or 5200– 3800 BC). This was centred on the frequent deposition in stone monuments of disarticulated animal remains, mostly cattle. Animal burials are known also from other African contexts, but regional extent of the phenomenon, state of preservation of monuments, and associated rock art make the Messak case unique. GIS analysis, excavation data, radiocarbon dating, zooarchaeological and isotopic (Sr, C, O) analyses of animal remains, and botanical information are used to explore this highly formalized ritual and the lifeways of a pastoral community in the Holocene Sahara.

[...]


Middle Pastoral herders of the central Sahara


Cattle and small livestock were introduced in the Central Sahara at the end of the 8th millennium BP, and slowly adopted by local groups of hunter-gatherers [2]. In the Acacus and Messak mountains (SW Libya) a full exploitation of domesticates, which included dairying [7], is dated to the Middle Pastoral (6100– 5000 BP), a cultural phase generally characterized by wet and warm environmental conditions [34–36].


--Mary Anne Tafuri et al., Inside the ‘‘African Cattle Complex’’: Animal Burials in the Holocene Central Sahara



 -



quote:
Archaeologists have uncovered 20 Stone-Age skeletons in and around a rock shelter in Libya's Sahara desert, according to a new study.

The skeletons date between 8,000 and 4,200 years ago, meaning the burial place was used for millennia.

"It must have been a place of memory," said study co-author Mary Anne Tafuri, an archaeologist at the University of Cambridge. "People throughout time have kept it, and they have buried their people, over and over, generation after generation."


About 15 women and children were buried in the rock shelter, while five men and juveniles were buried under giant stone heaps called tumuli outside the shelter during a later period, when the region turned to desert.

The findings, which are detailed in the March issue of the Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, suggest the culture changed with the climate.

Millennia of burials

From about 8,000 to 6,000 years ago, the Sahara desert region, called Wadi Takarkori, was filled with scrubby vegetation and seasonal green patches. Stunning rock art depicts ancient herding animals, such as cows, which require much more water to graze than the current environment could support, Tafuri said.

Tafuri and her colleague Savino di Lernia began excavating the archaeological site between 2003 and 2006. At the same site, archaeologists also uncovered huts, animal bones and pots with traces of the earliest fermented dairy products in Africa. [See Images of the Stone-Age Skeletons]

To date the skeletons, Tafuri measured the remains for concentrations of isotopes, or molecules of the same element with different weights.

The team concluded that the skeletons were buried over four millennia, with most of the remains in the rock shelter buried between 7,300 and 5,600 years ago.

The males and juveniles under the stone heaps were buried starting 4,500 years ago, when the region became more arid. Rock art confirms the dry up, as the cave paintings began to depict goats, which need much less water to graze than cows, Tafuri said.

The ancient people also grew up not far from the area where they were buried, based on a comparison of isotopes in tooth enamel, which forms early in childhood, with elements in the nearby environment.

Shift in culture?

The findings suggest the burial place was used for millennia by the same group of people. It also revealed a divided society.

"The exclusive use of the rock shelter for female and sub-adult burials points to a persistent division based on gender," wrote Marina Gallinaro, a researcher in African studies at Sapienza University of Rome, who was not involved in the study, in an email to LiveScience.

One possibility is that during the earlier period, women had a more critical role in the society, and families may have even traced their descent through the female line. But once the Sahara began its inexorable expansion into the region about 5,000 years ago, the culture shifted and men's prominence may have risen as a result, Gallinaro wrote.

The region as a whole is full of hundreds of sites yet to be excavated, said Luigi Boitani, a biologist at Sapienza University of Rome, who has worked on archaeological sites in the region but was not involved in the study.

"The area is an untapped treasure," Boitani said.

The new discovery also highlights the need to protect the fragile region, which has been closed to archaeologists since the revolution that ousted dictator Moammar el Gadhafi.

Takarkori is very close to the main road that leads from Libya into neighboring Niger, so rebels and other notorious political figures, such as Gadhafi's sons, have frequently passed through the area to escape the country, he said.

http://www.livescience.com/27697-stone-age-libyan-burials-unearthed.html
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 17 pages: 1  2  3  ...  13  14  15  16  17   

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