posted
Why would i need to answer the question I asked?
It really doesn't matter which one you pick. The follow up question is basically: why is "Eurasian populaion X" closer to Africans than the one you picked if "Eurasian population X" has not mixed with Africans?
Of course he will have some bullshit reason but he would clearly understand that X Eurasian population can be closer to Africans than Y Eurasian population.
And from there he would logically see that X Eurasian population is inturn closer to X African population vs Y African population.
The follow up question is basically: why is "Eurasian population X" closer to Africans than the one you picked if "Eurasian population X" has not mixed with Africans?
the genetic distance of various Eurasian populations to Africans can vary according to different environmental conditions each given population was subject to, evolving over thousands of years, how long a given population has been out of Africa, and isolation/drift/founder effect is variable
>> independant of later admixture with Africans a given population may or may not have undergone due interbreeding with migrant Africans, also affecting distance
Posts: 42935 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
The follow up question is basically: why is "Eurasian population X" closer to Africans than the one you picked if "Eurasian population X" has not mixed with Africans?
the genetic distance of various Eurasian populations to Africans can vary according to different environmental conditions each given population was subject to, evolving over thousands of years, how long a given population has been out of Africa, and isolation/drift/founder effect is variable
>> independant of later admixture with Africans a given population may or may not have undergone due interbreeding with migrant Africans, also affecting distance
Explain that to Amun Ra. You are the forum troll and you know more than he does.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: I'm not talking about early modern humans.
But that paper you've posted does. The authors reject the out of Africa "hypotheses". And the fact that modern mankind arose in Africa, then spread from there to populate the world.
the fact that modern mankind arose in Africa then spread from there to populate the world >>> is the Out of Africa hypothesis
that's basic, please do some remedial study
So why do you think I've posted the paper on "An African American Paternal Lineage Adds an Extremely Ancient Root to the Human Y Chromosome Phylogenetic Tree"? Because it's a remedial study.
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor: Beyoku is going to answer you. Beyoku gets mad whenever I interfere. In a way Beyoku is right.
beyoku is not going to answer which population is the most genetically distinct from Sub Saharans he's trying to trick Amun Ra into doing it Son of Ra is bravest so far, he took a guess at it
It appears Beyoku answered you after all. The question now becomes, do you understand any of it?
In those X versus Y diagrams. Or do you need to do some remedial study? Because apparently you didn't get it.
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: @ amun ra. Then why are Eurasians closer to Southern Sudanese considering southern Sudanese have an abundance of haplogroup A and B.(non CT m168 lineages) Some being exclusively A and B. As well as southern Sudanese have primarily L lineages other than L3?
Beside through bi-directional admixture with Eurasian populations, random genetic drift is the only explanation. How else do you explain it, since the A and B haplogroups were not part of the OOA migrations? Even if you randomly separate in 2 groups an Akan population from West Africa, lets say from the same village or town, into 2 groups. One of the group will be closer or further away to any Eurasian populations because of random drift in the population. There's no 2 groups of people with exactly the same genetic profiles including members of the same ethnic group or even family. As a trivia, even "identical" twins got different genetic profiles due to random mutations.
Same thing with European populations between one another. I didn't check it out but maybe German are closer to Scandinavian populations than Italian or French people (or vice-versa). So it's either bi-directional admixture or random genetic drift which can explain it.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: Troll patrol. Why are you just posting random stuff Over and over? LOL
LOL at this maleficent drone, with cheap ineffective rebuttals.
Y-DNA haplogroup A contains lineages deriving from the earliest branching in the human Y chromosome tree.
quote: The oldest branching event, separating A0-P305 and A1-V161, is thought to have occurred about 140,000 years ago. Haplogroups A0-P305, A1a-M31 and A1b1a-M14 are restricted to Africa and A1b1b-M32 is nearly restricted to Africa. The haplogroup that would be named A1b2 is composed of haplogroups B through T. The internal branching of haplogroup A1-V161 into A1a-M31, A1b1, and BT (A1b2) may have occurred about 110,000 years ago. A0-P305 is found at low frequency in Central and West Africa.
A1a-M31 is observed in northwestern Africans; A1b1a-M14 is seen among click language-speaking Khoisan populations.
A1b1b-M32 has a wide distribution including Khoisan speaking and East African populations, and scattered members on the Arabian Peninsula.
posted
^^^ more and more charts and data avoiding which population is the most genetically distinct from Sub Saharans?
Posts: 42935 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
One look at a fully global dendrogram of either uniparental, autosome, AIM, or full genome data reveals the "antipodes." Hell, as Beyoku hinted, even the STRUCTURE/ADMIX analysis graphs posted on ES show it.
SPEAKING OF AVOIDANCE you ask but won't even answer a few simple questions (they are not challenges) but have the bile to try to taunt others into kissing your ass..
=-=
So what does your method reveal about say
* East Africa vs Tigara or * Pygmy vs EuroAmerican ?
By your method is Jebel Sahaba closer to * East Africa or * West Africa?
What is the meaning of branches on the same limb?
What is being measured as the distance between populations?
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
The way to determine the distance bewteen two populations on the above dendogram is to
start at the name of the first populaltion.
Then you follow the line path eminating from that name it like a mouse in a maze to the second popualation.
You can move in any direction along the path, up, down, backwards or forwards, whatever is the shortest distance from one population to the next.
Since the scale of this chart is horizontal you only record the distances of the horizontal movements.
When you put these horizontal segments together and measure them in total, that is the distance bewteen two populations
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: ^^^ more and more charts and data avoiding which population is the most genetically distinct from Sub Saharans?
Ps, the oldest sub Sharan African branch is most genetically distinct from the most recent Eurasians. Marinate on that one.
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: why are you then arguing that some populations in Africa cannot be closer to certain Eurasians than other Africans?
I didn't answer you when you said that a couple of times in this thread because it was a red herring.
I never said such thing, unless you can prove it by directly quoting me. I said there was indeed a substructure in Africa before the OOA migrations which affected OOA migrants but it was between the Y-DNA CT carriers and the non-CT carriers (A and B haplogroup carriers). As well as between MtDNA L3 carriers and non-L3 carriers.
CT and L3 haplogroup carriers unites East and West Africans as well as the majority of the African populations. So it can't constitute the basis to say that modern East Africans were particularly closer to Eurasian at the moment of the OOA migrations before any back migrations.
Basically, both modern Eastern and Western African population (E-P2 haplogroup carriers) originate in Eastern Africa at a time period after the OOA migrations.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor: It seems you're avoiding the above. LOL
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: ^^^ more and more charts and data avoiding which population is the most genetically distinct from Sub Saharans?
Ps, the oldest sub Sharan African branch is most genetically distinct from the most recent Eurasians. Marinate on that one.
I'm not sure you are correct on this wouldn't the most recent Eurasians be the ones who left Africa the latest? It seems of Eurasians the most recent Eurasians would be closer to Africans having not been out of Africa as long as the older, least recent Eurasians
To clearify name the Eurasian group, let's not keep it a secret
Posts: 42935 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor: It seems you're avoiding the above. LOL
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: ^^^ more and more charts and data avoiding which population is the most genetically distinct from Sub Saharans?
Ps, the oldest sub Sharan African branch is most genetically distinct from the most recent Eurasians. Marinate on that one.
I'm not sure you are correct on this wouldn't the most recent Eurasians be the ones who left Africa the latest? It seems of Eurasians the most recent Eurasians would be closer to Africans having not been out of Africa as long as the older, least recent Eurasians
To clearify name the Eurasian group, let's not keep it a secret
I don't know of a specific name/ branch, and I don't see the importance in it anyway. But logic tells that the oldest African populations (with the oldest "SNP's") are least likely to cluster with younger (youngest) Eurasian populations (who have much younger mutations) Thus are most distant.
But, let's be clear, you are even too stupid to look up SNP's inheritance or understand a split region. How are you then going to say, "your not sure about it"? That doesn't make any sense.
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: Posted in another thread:
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: why are you then arguing that some populations in Africa cannot be closer to certain Eurasians than other Africans?
I didn't answer you when you said that a couple of times in this thread because it was a red herring.
I never said such thing, unless you can prove it by directly quoting me. I said there was indeed a substructure in Africa before the OOA migrations which affected OOA migrants but it was between the Y-DNA CT carriers and the non-CT carriers (A and B haplogroup carriers). As well as between MtDNA L3 carriers and non-L3 carriers.
CT and L3 haplogroup carriers unites East and West Africans as well as the majority of the African populations. So it can't constitute the basis to say that modern East Africans were particularly closer to Eurasian at the moment of the OOA migrations before any back migrations.
Basically, both modern Eastern and Western African population (E-P2 haplogroup carriers) originate in Eastern Africa at a time period after the OOA migrations.
What exactly makes a haplogroup a haplogroup? What are the building blocks?
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
why are you asking Amun Ra stupid questions? How can you make remarks about haplgroups but not know what exactly makes a haplogroup a haplogroup?
Posts: 42935 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: why are you asking Amun Ra stupid questions? How can you make remarks about haplgroups but not know what exactly makes a haplogroup a haplogroup?
Blah blah blah.
My question is relevant and fundamental. Something you don't know about, thus you call it stupid. Thou stupid is what you are, with all those stupid racist questions you had over the many years.
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
Careful! This one's bogus. It's not Tishkoff at all.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
It is labelled: Figure S7: Neighbor-joining tree from pairwise (δμ)2 microsatellite genetic distances between populations (S16). African population branches (right) are color-coded according to language family classification; non-Africans are shown on the left. Population clusters by major geographic region are noted. Nodes supported by bootstrap values of at least 50% are labeled
I wonder why you call it bogus. You don't like it or what?
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Unlike you I don't judge science by what pleases me.
Obviously you never did a simple 1:1 comparison between the bullsheet and the real thing because in less than a minute you'd've seen the variance.
Who knows who twisted Tishkoff's phylogeny out of shape and replaced the actual distance values with figures from I don't know where / who knows where?
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Unlike you I don't judge science by what pleases me.
Obviously you never did a simple 1:1 comparison between the bullsheet and the real thing because in less than a minute you'd've seen the variance.
Unlike me my foot. The 2 are exactly similar you dimwit. The question is the same. Why would you say one is bogus when they are exactly the same? You don't like it or what? It's just a bit ridiculous to think the website would post a bogus genetic distance tree in this context, so I wonder what make you say that.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^ The question is rhetorical of course. The undercover idiots on this site don't like it, for some reason, when you post data showing the close genetic relationship between African populations (the same can be said about European, Native American and East Asian populations respectively). As I said many times it's because of 1-Common origin of African people after the OOA migrations of non-Africans. 2- Extensive admixture between African populations 3-Founder/Bottleneck effect on OOA populations (2 times for Native Americans one at the OOA event the other at the Bering Strait migratory event)
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Are you blind? I dae you to snip just the first few branches of the one and the other and post them here proving your point they are identical.
Grow up and put your childishness behind you, son. I have absolutely no problem with the authentic Tishkoff phylogeny. Unlike you I don't go by what pleases me or refuse reasonable correction labeling it racism (you have never experienced racism for real or you wouldn't use the term so lightly.
Now get to work. Snip snip post unless you're totally without a clue (as well as a cretin). You and your baby nuts haven't even visited the site where the bogus phylogeny comes from with no given source or author of the "unravelling." - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ↓ - - - - - - - -
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^You realize people can actually download Figure S7 (with the links I posted just above) and compare the two, right?
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
I wonder why you call it bogus. You don't like it or what?
I was wondering the same thing
Posts: 42935 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: ^^^You realize people can actually download Figure S7 (with the links I posted just above) and compare the two, right?
So shut the **** up and do it already asshole.
I told you to do that in the first place.
How in the hell do you think I discovered it's a misrepresentation if I didn't compare it to the authentic NJT in the first place, fool.
I reissue my challenge of yesterday to you Do a 1:1 comparison of Tishkoff's authentic NJT vs the dhushara site 'unravelled' fraud that ttbomk appears in no scientific journal or book with credits as to who produced it.
IT IS NOT TISHKOFF'S NJT AND DISTANCE VALUES.
This is the last I have to say to you on this. Anyone fool enough to believe you deserves to bask in their co-joint ignorance with you.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
My apologies to ARtU on Tishkoff's NJT.
I was working from the below which has no such NJT whereas the two sided (Eurasian vs African) version is in a later corrected reissue.
In the main article S. Africa and Pygimes appear like this
Figure 1. Neighbor-joining tree from pairwise D2 genetic distances between populations (65). African population branches are color-coded according to language family classification. Population clusters by major geographic region are noted; bootstrap values above 700 out of 1000 are indicated by thicker lines and bootstrap number.
But the updated supplement has them separated like so ...
Notice the treeing and distances do not agree probably due to the basis each NJT was built on.
Thanks ARtU, I will add the revised SOM to my db.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by tropicals redacted: @Lioness
quote: sorry to interupt your chat with cass but this chart shows limb ratios, the most elongated are at top right, East African The least, bottom right Somalis are East African horners, the most elongated Egyptians, less elongated
Yes, I know it shows limb ratios, but explain its relevance to what I asked cass.
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler:
SPEAKING OF AVOIDANCE you ask but won't even answer a few simple questions (they are not challenges) but have the bile to try to taunt others into kissing your ass..
=-=
So what does your method reveal about say
* East Africa vs Tigara or * Pygmy vs EuroAmerican ?
By your method is Jebel Sahaba closer to * East Africa or * West Africa?
What is the meaning of branches on the same limb?
What is being measured as the distance between populations?
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
The way to determine the distance bewteen two populations on the above dendogram is to
start at the name of the first populaltion.
Then you follow the line path eminating from that name it like a mouse in a maze to the second popualation.
You can move in any direction along the path, up, down, backwards or forwards, whatever is the shortest distance from one population to the next.
Since the scale of this chart is horizontal you only record the distances of the horizontal movements.
When you put these horizontal segments together and measure them in total, that is the distance bewteen two populations
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic