posted
I have no particular study in mind but I hear the claim on Egyptsearch all the time that the majority of Modern Egyptians are not descendants of the ancient Egyptians or if not have very little ancestry descendant of the ancient Egyptians
Now it's time to prove that claim with genetics, that is the challenge
Posts: 42939 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: MODERN EGYPTIANS on an average for the whole country are mostly (51% +) of FOREIGN ANCESTRY ???
prove it with genetics
.
What the study showed is that, Non-Africans are closely related to Egyptians, because those were the likely first Africans to invade the rest of the world.
Therefore, Egyptians are Africans, but Specifically Divergent (Local) from other Africans. Their connection to Non-Africans is Genetic, but I would say it was more likely a bi-directional Genetic Flow between Egyptians leaving Africa and Mixed Egyptians coming back to Africa (Egypt).
Posts: 496 | From: Greenland | Registered: Mar 2011
| IP: Logged |
but I hear the claim on Egyptsearch all the time that the majority of Modern Egyptians are primarily of foreign ancestry, that they are mainly the result of a history of invasions by non-Africans
And it's true Egypt was invaded several times
I'm asking people to prove by genetics that these invasions were to the extent changing the population of Egypt on average to be primarily (50% +) foreign non-Africans, prove that genetically
I'm talking about the majority of modern Egyptian today, is their ancestry more African or more foreign, prove it genetically with data on DNA
Posts: 42939 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Oh pshaw you provoker
That was done in the Berbers are not primarily African thread a little over a year ago.
Why bother w/u when its in one ear and out the other or through the front door and out the back
A good capsule of Ennafaa's (2011, Fregel co-author) data for our purposes are Tables S5 & S6 with the Figure 4 pie.
Here are TS5 & TS6 with Morocco, Tunisia, Libya, and Egypt population frequencies for select mtDNA & nrY Hgs.
Out of Ennafaa's selected African samples * Egypt is not primarily African
. .
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: MODERN EGYPTIANS on an average for the whole country are mostly (51% +) of FOREIGN ANCESTRY ???
prove it with genetics
.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Sanchez-Quinto's (2012 with Botigue, Comas & Lalueza-Fox co-authors) Table 1 clearly quantifies their Figure 1.
Here are those charts reordered from inner Africa to Atlantic and Mediterranean North Africa to 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.
Also from the Berbers are not primarily African thread qv.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote: I have no particular study in mind but I hear the claim on Egyptsearch all the time that the majority of Modern Egyptians are not descendants of the ancient Egyptians or if not have very little ancestry descendant of the ancient Egyptians
Please, your question quite clearly arose from yesterday's thread on the Humans Trekked Out of Africa Via Egypt study. You wrote:
quote: Let's see somebody prove with genetics they [modern Egyptians] are 80% foreign
And:
quote: Not including this article do you think modern Egyptians on average for the whole country are more than half non-African or less than half non-African ?
Again, why not contact the authors? Rather than speculating as to whether you think they're wrong, e-mail them. Then let us know what they say. I would suggest that to anyone else who has questions with their findings.
Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013
| IP: Logged |
I was inspired by the other thread to do this topic because it reminded me of something people bring up frequently on Egyyptsearch. Hence I have moved the topic to a different forum People say here that modern Egyptians are primarily foreigners to Africa in their ancestry and this is the result of a history of invasions. So I don't need to contact the authors of Tracing the Route of Modern Humans out of Africa by Using 225 Human Genome Sequences because I am interested in articles focused on people coming into Egypt and the makeup of modern Egyptians rather than OOA migrations paper. So you can ask me ten times to contact the authors of the OOA paper and I'm not going to do it. This is a new topic on Egyptian demographic ancestry not AMH OOA I am interested in the raw haplotype data and Tukuler understood this but instead of being concise to the topic he merely copy and pasted a lot of other remarks about berbers and didn't link article titles.
Anyway the info he posted might be applicable to the inquiry
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler:
Here are TS5 & TS6 with Morocco, Tunisia, Libya, and Egypt population frequencies for select mtDNA & nrY Hgs.
^^^ O.k. somebody new comes in and there's no article title and link to see what they say about samples for the data etc, that is basic respect to the reader
Anyway the info can be used to answer the question because this is not only authors as in the second post giving percentages African/Non African this has HG frequencies. That is what I'm looking for.
Tukular says this show Modern Egyptians are less than 50% African and the HGs are listed in the left column However for this new thread and any new readers what is required is a break down of what HGs are African and which are not and to go over that again for old readers
Then is needed is the sum total African vs non-African of Egyptians
And if the ancestry of modern Egyptians is even say on average 30% related to specific alleles of ancient Egyptians that could be more than any other group.
-But at the same time they could be a primarily Non-African population but in order to prove that you need to indicate what the foreign haplogroups are if you want to say they are primarily foreign, that is basic and that is not in the thread yet
Posts: 42939 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Seems to me that, rather than getting anything approaching an expert opinion, you'd prefer to muddy the waters. Your raising this topic at this moment in time is everything to do with undermining the results of the paper released yesterday.
If you contacted the authors of the study, they could clarify their methodologies and findings for you, and give you insight into how they arrived at their 80% average. But you know there's a risk that you wouldn't be able to run your sh1t with them. That's why you prefer internet speculation, rather than anything too conclusive. You know how damaging that would be for you, so you're being evasive. It's pretty obvious really.
quote:So you can ask me ten times to contact the authors of the OOA paper and I'm not going to do it. This is a new topic on Egyptian demographic ancestry not AMH OOA
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: MODERN EGYPTIANS on an average for the whole country are mostly (51% +) of FOREIGN ANCESTRY ???
prove it with genetics
.
What makes it partially difficult is that Northeast Africa obviously had outgoing populations. So SNP's found in the region can be due to outgoing as it expanded outside of Africa.
Therefore are being claimed as "so called" Eurasian.
Posts: 22243 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Asar Imhotep.did you get my email.I have tried to email you with no success.I always get the msg,'u must log in first'but after I have logged in and rewrite my post again,I hit send,but it tells me the same thing.
Posts: 306 | From: Kenya | Registered: Dec 2013
| IP: Logged |
posted
I will just repost it here but remove my email. just saw your interview with Dr Sambu today on YouTube,WHAT A HUMBLE MAN..I was really impressed.I have personally never met him in person but I want to.please hook me up..I am working on ancient Egyptian transliteration system based on proto-kalenjin instead of Coptic as the ones used by modern egyptologists.proto-kalenjin is closer to ancient Egyptian than both boharic and sahidic Coptic.Take away Phoenician,Hebrew and classical Greek from Coptic,you are left with with demotic Egyptian which is mostly proto-kalenjin.To get proto-kalenjin I will have to sample all the kalenjin dialects I.e kipsigis,nandi,tugen,pokot,marakwet,sebei.Asar whenever u wanna come to Africa to do a linguistic research,I will be ur host.Kenya is a good place to start,3 language groups of Africa out of 4 are found in Kenya alone ;1) afro-asiatic cushitic(somalis,borana/oromo), also many semitic speaking Ethiopians are found in Nairobi and Mombasa.2)Nilo-Saharan maasai,luo,redo,turkana and samburu.3)Bantu,over 30 tribes,largest being Kikuyu and Luhya.Kenya is a linguistic paradise a most unique African country.In case you decide to come know that my house is your house,I will be your host.thanks
Posts: 306 | From: Kenya | Registered: Dec 2013
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by LEDAMA: Asar Imhotep.did you get my email.I have tried to email you with no success.I always get the msg,'u must log in first'but after I have logged in and rewrite my post again,I hit send,but it tells me the same thing.
Greetings Ledama. Where were you trying to email me at? My website (www.asarimhotep.com)?
Posts: 853 | From: Houston | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Asar Imhotep: Greetings Tukler
Is this study saying that the Egyptian admixture of EurAsians is 67%? This coming from the chart you posted below:
This is exactly what I'm talking about. Tukuler critcized xyyman for altering charts Now the above chart was made from scratch by Tukuler and he has devised his own terminology and consolidations
-and he has not referenced the article title or the Table he interpreted
- Although his compiled figures and terms are fair to the intent of the article
And now Asar Imhotep is asking about it when if the link was there he wouldn't have had to
Here is the full reference, this should have stated in on the Tukular charts as >>
______________________________________
" data compiled from Table 1 of
North African Populations Carry the Signature of Admixture with Neandertals 2012
^^^ Now we have the full citation that makes for easy access to the Egyptsearch readership
And here is the pertinent quote from the article:
quote:
We ran ADMIXTURE for k equal 2 to 7 and obtained CV errors, and determined that the best k (the one with lowest cross-validation error) is k = 4. Results (Figure 1) are coincident with those previously published [17] and show that North Morocco, Libya and Egypt carry high proportions of European and Near Eastern ancestral components, whereas Tunisian Berbers and Saharawi are those populations with highest autochthonous North African component....
The results of the f4 ancestry ratio test (Table 2 and Table S1) show that North African populations vary in the percentage of Neandertal inferred admixture, primarily depending on the amount of European or Near Eastern ancestry they present (Table 1). Populations like North Morocco and Egypt, with the highest European and Near Eastern component (∼40%), have also the highest amount of Neandertal ancestry (∼60–70%) (Figure 3). On the contrary, South Morocco that exhibits the highest Sub-Saharan component (∼60%), shows the lowest Neandertal signal (20%). Interestingly, the analysis of the Tunisian and N-TUN populations shows a higher Neandertal ancestry component than any other North African population and at least the same (or even higher) as other Eurasian populations (100–138%) (Figure 3).....
With the current data, however, it is not possible to discard the ancient African substructure hypothesis [8]. Although ours and some previous results [9] tend to favor the admixture hypothesis as the most plausible one, we think that a complete clarification of this issue can only be achieved with a Neandertal high coverage genome, such as this recently achieved for Denisova [32]. This, and sequencing data of North African populations, especially those with a high autochthonous component, may help elucidate more precisely the interbreeding process with Neandertals. In any case, our results show that Neandertal genomic traces do not mark a division between African and non-Africans but rather a division between Sub-Saharan Africans and the rest of modern human groups, including those from North Africa.
Ok go to Tukular's version of this chart, top of post
he has
EGYPTIAN (modern) =
33% African 19% Berber 67% Eurasian
_______________________
and as corresponding to the
Sánchez-Quinto Table (bolded) >>
EGYPTIAN (modern) =
33% African [ 19% N. Mahgreb + 14% Sub Saharan]
67% Eurasian [37% Europe + 30% Near East]
_________________________
That's a fair interpretation. However it's not the raw haplotype data and these terms have their ambiguities
Posts: 42939 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Asar Imhotep: Greetings Tukler
Is this study saying that the Egyptian admixture of EurAsians is 67%? This coming from the chart you posted below:
HTP Asar Imhotep
Unfortunately there is no understanding my synopsis on its own without taking the thread into consideration so please avail yourself a printout of the Berbers are primarly not African thread to peruse at your leisure.
Meanwhile here is the corrected post featuring what I used from Sanchez- Quinto (2012)
Originally posted 14 March, 2014 4:45 PM
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: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by Asar Imhotep:
Greetings Tukler
Is this study saying that the Egyptian admixture of EurAsians is 67%? This coming from the chart you posted below:
. .
HTP Asar Imhotep
Unfortunately there is no understanding my synopsis on its own without taking the thread into consideration so please avail yourself a printout of the Berbers are primarly not African thread to peruse at your leisure. You should start @ p15
Meanwhile here is the corrected post featuring what I used from Sanchez- Quinto (2012)
Originally posted 14 March, 2014 4:45 PM
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.
Also be sure to download print and read the Sanchez-Quinto (2012) report itself.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
. I made it plain I want this thread as robust as possible.
Nobody had to start alternative threads to express their view. I invited Clyde to park all his stuff here. I didn't personally invite Swenet but he too is for sure welcome to post his viewpoint here (sans annoying distractive gifs that make the thread clownish).
And yes I explicitly wrote when I posted my first analysis that I'm ignoring assignment controversies so as to let the reports as published speak through their raw data.
I noted where authors recognized that a given haplogroup assignment can and does differ from its parent or umbrella macrohaplogroup geography.
A child is not the parent and the reductio ad absurdum argument about lumping all children by their parent's geography ultimately resolves to making them all African.
Strongly opinionated objectors don't care. They only care for their own point of view regardless of attempted objectivity. If they want to broach grandstanding emotionally appealing threads let 'em.
The problem I'm having with autosomals is that of the recent studies I found with pertinent STRUCTURE or ADMIXTURE skylines (Henn, Botigue, Sanchez-Quinto) only the one I posted yesterday clearly delineates geographies.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: I am interested in the raw haplotype data and Tukuler understood this but instead of being concise to the topic he merely copy and pasted a lot of other remarks about berbers and didn't link article titles.
Anyway the info he posted might be applicable to the inquiry
. .
Besides being a talented boy I am a busy man, preoccupied of late with offline real life matters.
Anyone of medium intelligence can extract the Egypt material. I have no interest in trimming my old postings down to Egypt only. Do you think I produced that stuff in mere minutes back then?
Your best bet is to follow Trops advice and correspond with report authors. Until you learn to do that you will never earn your bachelor's degree from EgyptSearch U.
Meanwhile bright post grads Cardova and Gebor will soon attain to their PhD's.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by LEDAMA: Asar Imhotep.did you get my email.I have tried to email you with no success.I always get the msg,'u must log in first'but after I have logged in and rewrite my post again,I hit send,but it tells me the same thing.
Greetings Ledama. Where were you trying to email me at? My website (www.asarimhotep.com)?
I tried to send you a private message using my Egypt search account but it was frustrating,now I got ur email account I will contact you soon.Thanks..htp
Posts: 306 | From: Kenya | Registered: Dec 2013
| IP: Logged |
quote:MODERN EGYPTIANS on average are mostly of FOREIGN ANCESTRY ???
So what?
We know modern egyptians are not the same as the ancient due mostly to post dynastic greek, roman, persian, arab, etc migrations. They are a nice mix of all those people including indigenous Ancient Egyptians (aka black Africans).
Since modern Egypt have a high proportion of African ancestry in their populations, it shows us that the original population was African. Especially considering Ramses III was E1b1a and the DNA analysis of the Ancient Egyptian mummies (JAMA, BMJ, DNA Tribes, etc).
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:MODERN EGYPTIANS on average are mostly of FOREIGN ANCESTRY ???
So what?
We know modern egyptians are not the same as the ancient due mostly to post dynastic greek, roman, persian, arab, etc migrations. They are a nice mix of all those people including indigenous Ancient Egyptians (aka black Africans).
Since modern Egypt have a high proportion of African ancestry in their populations, it shows us that the original population was African. Especially considering Ramses III was E1b1a and the DNA analysis of the Ancient Egyptian mummies (JAMA, BMJ, DNA Tribes, etc).
The thread title is a question hence the ?? marks Just becuase you can point to invasion that does not mean the people are not primarily native because of it
However they might not be
and that can be examined by DNA
sub title of the thread:
What is the genetic ancestry on average of modern Egypt? I'm waiting to see if anybody has more articles on modern Egyptian DNA
Posts: 42939 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Why not contact Pagani? Maybe he'd have information for you that helps with the answers you're looking for.
Or are you intentionally trying to obfuscate, intentionally swimming in denial?
quote: The thread title is a question hence the ?? marks Just becuase you can point to invasion that does not mean the people are not primarily native because of it
However they might not be
and that can be examined by DNA
sub title of the thread:
What is the genetic ancestry on average of modern Egypt? I'm waiting to see if anybody has more articles on modern Egyptian DNA
That is why the frequency in "Eurasain" increases AWAY from Africa in some studies.
But in the Trekk paper(Pagani) they masked/removed the "Eurasian" components and indentified true "back-migration" as foriegn. The debate is "when", Turk or Saudi? .
The author referenced TS2 for an explanation of the "mid-point ". The table does not explain how they came up with the Islamic Expansion. It shows the "event" took place 750ya +-25y. midpoint 750ya
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: MODERN EGYPTIANS on an average for the whole country are mostly (51% +) of FOREIGN ANCESTRY ???
prove it with genetics
.
What makes it partially difficult is that Northeast Africa obviously had outgoing populations. So SNP's found in the region can be due to outgoing as it expanded outside of Africa.
Therefore are being claimed as "so called" Eurasian.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:MODERN EGYPTIANS on average are mostly of FOREIGN ANCESTRY ???
So what?
We know modern egyptians are not the same as the ancient due mostly to post dynastic greek, roman, persian, arab, etc migrations. They are a nice mix of all those people including indigenous Ancient Egyptians (aka black Africans).
Since modern Egypt have a high proportion of African ancestry in their populations, it shows us that the original population was African. Especially considering Ramses III was E1b1a and the DNA analysis of the Ancient Egyptian mummies (JAMA, BMJ, DNA Tribes, etc).
The thread title is a question hence the ?? marks Just becuase you can point to invasion that does not mean the people are not primarily native because of it
However they might not be
and that can be examined by DNA
sub title of the thread:
What is the genetic ancestry on average of modern Egypt? I'm waiting to see if anybody has more articles on modern Egyptian DNA
It's the same hogwas with you over and over again.
Ancient Egyptians were examend to be tropical adapted while Eurasians weren't. It ends right there!
Posts: 22243 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote: "Ancient Egypt belongs to a language group known as 'Afroasiatic' (formerly called Hamito-Semitic) and its closest relatives are other north-east African languages from Somalia to Chad. Egypt's cultural features, both material and ideological and particularly in the earliest phases, show clear connections with that same broad area. In sum, ancient Egypt was an African culture, developed by African peoples, who had wide ranging contacts in north Africa and western Asia."
--Robert Morkot (2005) The Egyptians: An Introduction. p. 10)
quote:"The ancient Egyptians were not 'white' in any European sense, nor were they 'Caucasian'... we can say that the earliest population of ancient Egypt included African people from the upper Nile, African people from the regions of the Sahara and modern Libya, and smaller numbers of people who had come from south-western Asia and perhaps the Arabian penisula."
--Robert Morkot (2005). The Egyptians: An Introduction. pp. 12-13
quote:"Over the last two decades, numerous contemporary (Khartoum Neolithic) sites and cemeteries have been excavated in the Central Sudan.. The most striking point to emerge is the overall similarity of early neolithic developments inhabitation, exchange, material culture and mortuary customs in the Khartoum region to those underway at the same time in the Egyptian Nile Valley, far to the north." (Wengrow, David (2003) "Landscapes of Knowledge, Idioms of Power: The African Foundations of Ancient Egyptian Civilization Reconsidered," in Ancient Egypt in Africa, David O'Connor and Andrew Reid, eds. Ancient Egypt in Africa. London: University College London Press, 2003, pp. 119-137)
--O'Connor, David B., Reid, Andrew
Ancient Egypt in Africa
Posts: 22243 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:MODERN EGYPTIANS on average are mostly of FOREIGN ANCESTRY ???
So what?
We know modern egyptians are not the same as the ancient due mostly to post dynastic greek, roman, persian, arab, etc migrations. They are a nice mix of all those people including indigenous Ancient Egyptians (aka black Africans).
Since modern Egypt have a high proportion of African ancestry in their populations, it shows us that the original population was African. Especially considering Ramses III was E1b1a and the DNA analysis of the Ancient Egyptian mummies (JAMA, BMJ, DNA Tribes, etc).
The thread title is a question hence the ?? marks Just becuase you can point to invasion that does not mean the people are not primarily native because of it
However they might not be
and that can be examined by DNA
sub title of the thread:
What is the genetic ancestry on average of modern Egypt? I'm waiting to see if anybody has more articles on modern Egyptian DNA
You have been answered a few times all ready, but your intelligence and comprehension is lacking, thus you iterate. Then when the same is being posted you'll say it has been posted 166 times already.
Posts: 22243 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Rosenberger et al. Dog chasing his tail
That is why the frequency in "Eurasain" increases AWAY from Africa in some studies.
But in the Trekk paper(Pagani) they masked/removed the "Eurasian" components and indentified true "back-migration" as foriegn. The debate is "when", Turk or Saudi? .
The author referenced TS2 for an explanation of the "mid-point ". The table does not explain how they came up with the Islamic Expansion. It shows the "event" took place 750ya +-25y. midpoint 750ya
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: MODERN EGYPTIANS on an average for the whole country are mostly (51% +) of FOREIGN ANCESTRY ???
prove it with genetics
.
What makes it partially difficult is that Northeast Africa obviously had outgoing populations. So SNP's found in the region can be due to outgoing as it expanded outside of Africa.
Therefore are being claimed as "so called" Eurasian.
The masked likely can be found in older papers by the leading author Luca Pagani.
quote: The presence of three diverse Afro-Asiatic branches (Omotic, Semitic, and Cushitic) makes the Horn of Africa one potential source of this family, although the Ethio- Semitic branch is likely to have originated at a later stage in the Middle East. 23 The Nilotic languages, represented in Ethiopia by the East Sudanic, Kunama, and Koman branches, are more widespread in Sudan, and their presence in Ethiopia is probably the result of recent demo- graphic processes.24 Similarly, genetic studies indicate that a major component of recent Ethiopian ancestry originates outside Africa: for example, half of the mtDNA haplo- types16 and more than one-fifth of Y haplotypes17 found in Ethiopia belong to lineages that, on the basis of phylo- geographic criteria, have been attributed to a non-African rather than a sub-Saharan African origin. These historical admixture events are themselves of interest to historians, anthropologists, and linguists, as well as to geneticists.
Our current study is motivated by four questions. First, where do the Ethiopians stand in the African genetic landscape? Second, what is the extent of recent gene flow from outside Africa into Ethiopia, when did it occur, and is there evidence of selection effects? Third, do genomic data support a route for out-of-Africa migration of modern humans across the mouth of the Red Sea? Fourth, assuming temporal stability of current popula- tions, what are the estimated ages of Ethiopian popula- tions relative to other African groups? In order to address these questions, we generated genome-wide SNP geno- types from Ethiopian individuals.
Given that little genetic information on Ethiopian pop- ulations was available in advance, we sought to analyze a broad sample of 188 Ethiopians from ten diverse popula- tions, chosen from a collection of > 5,000 samples assem- bled by N.B.25,26 The samples genotyped included repre- sentatives of a range of geographical regions and all four linguistic groups (Semitic, Cushitic, Omotic, and Nilotic). For comparative studies, we combined our Ethiopian data with published data from the HGDP27 and HapMap39 projects, as well as more focused studies.28,29 Furthermore, to compensate for the lack of published data of popula- tions immediately surrounding Ethiopia, we additionally genotyped 24 South Sudanese and 23 Somali samples.
--Luca Pagani et al.
Ethiopian Genetic Diversity Reveals Linguistic Stratification and Complex Influences on the Ethiopian Gene Pool
Yet, we have Jibril Hirbo, Sara Tishkoff saying this:
quote: Human genetic variation particularly in Africa is still poorly understood. This is despite a consensus on the large African effective population size compared to populations from other continents. Based on sequencing of the mitochondrial Cytochrome C Oxidase subunit II (MT-CO2), and genome wide microsatellite data we observe evidence suggesting the effective size (Ne) of humans to be larger than the current estimates, with a foci of increased genetic diversity in east Africa, and a population size of east Africans being at least 2-6 fold larger than other populations. Both phylogenetic and network analysis indicate that east Africans possess more ancestral lineages in comparison to various continental populations placing them at the root of the human evolutionary tree. Our results also affirm east Africa as the likely spot from which migration towards Asia has taken place. The study reflects the spectacular level of sequence variation within east Africans in comparison to the global sample, and appeals for further studies that may contribute towards filling the existing gaps in the database. The implication of these data to current genomic research, as well as the need to carry out defined studies of human genetic variation that includes more African populations; particularly east Africans is paramount.
[...]
Table 1 shows the population parameters and selective neutrality test (Tajima’s D) based on MT-CO2 variation of all continental groups, mean values and test of significance for the obtained values. Tajima’s D (Table 1) scored negative values consistent with human expansion within and outside of Africa (or exchange of alleles between neighboring demes, see discussion below) with satisfactory statistical scores. The transition to transversion ratio of 2:1 in our reported Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs) is consistent with being at the root of the gene tree and with neutral evolution distance based analysis using FST for mtDNA sequences and RST for microsatellite data were carried out for subsequent MDS plotting and a population by population correlation comparison using Mantel Test. The result showed no correlation with a P value of 0.66 similar to comparison between mitochondria and Y chromosome variations reported earlier [16].
[...]
The third cluster (C), includes members of almost all world populations particularly non-Africans who share a major haplo- type that seems to have originated within an east African gene pool (Table S1 and Figure 3).
[...]
Mutations and Haplotypes Frequencies in the MT-CO2
The sheer number of haplotypes, a basic measurement of genetic diversity, is also taken as an indication of Ne. As mitochondria are non-recombining the number of mutations and haplotypes is quite correlated. In the MT-CO2 sequence 68 haplotypes were estimated using Arlequin ver3.11 and assigned numbers from 1 to 68. Haplotype relative and absolute frequencies in the studied populations were also calculated. Strikingly, of the total 68 haplotypes, 43 occurred solely in east Africa (Table S1) of which 25 were in Sudanese, 9 in Eritreans and 5 in Ugandans and one Kenyan. The rest of the haplotypes were derived from or included east Africans with exception of 13 haplotypes, 4 in Africa 2 in Australia, 3 in Europe 1 in Arabia 1 America/Africa and 1 Europe/Africa. Of the 42 haplotype defining mutations (Table S2) in Sudanese and Eritreans 11 (26.2%) were non-synonymous (replacements) occurring in trans-membrane domain of COII protein while 31 (73.8%) were synonymous with transitions representing the majority of the mutations. Out of the 42 mutations (Table S2), 31 were previously reported in the literature and 11 were novel. All mutations in Ugandan MT-CO2 samples are synonymous and reported at http://dspace.nwu.ac.za/handle/10394/4221). All published haplogroups associated with the mutations are indicated in Table S2.
--Jibril Hirbo, Sara Tishkoff et al.
The Episode of Genetic Drift Defining the Migration of Humans out of Africa Is Derived from a Large East African Population Size
PLoS One. 2014; 9(5): e97674. Published online 2014 May 20. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0097674
And surprisingly the following was stated by Brenna Henn, in this interview on population genetics and population structure, considering African populations. "AND WITHIN EACH OF THESE GROUPS THERE IS AN AMAZING AMOUNT OF DIVERSITY, [...] THE DIVERSITY IS INDIGNIOUS TO AFRICAN POPULATIONS":
Tracing Family Trees, And Human History, With Genetics
posted
Well at least we know that R1b1a2 is only 1 per cent among modern-day Egyptians.
Which means which more than 50 per cent of all men in Western Europe, indicating that they share a common ancestor. And up to 70% of British men, who do not cluster.
Hats off to iGENEA for bolstering their claims.
The above appears to be a downstream of R1b1a or R-V88. Posts: 22243 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor:
You have been answered a few times all ready, but your intelligence and comprehension is lacking, thus you iterate. Then when the same is being posted you'll say it has been posted 166 times already.
One poster is one opinon, one set of sources for modern Egyptian DNA
Tukular posted data indicating the populaltion of modern Egypt is average is more foreign in ancestry than African based on the below Hg percenatges. Do you agree or should I assume everything he say you automatically agree with?
And with all your quoting you still haven't produced additional article sources breaking down modern Egyptian DNA, try to focus
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler:
A good capsule of Ennafaa's (2011, Fregel co-author) data for our purposes are Tables S5 & S6 with the Figure 4 pie.
Here are TS5 & TS6 with Morocco, Tunisia, Libya, and Egypt population frequencies for select mtDNA & nrY Hgs.
Out of Ennafaa's selected African samples * Egypt is not primarily African
. .
Therefore to claim that Egypt is not primarily African one has to assume that there are non African haplogroups in this chart (which ones? ) and that their percentages total more than 50% of the average modern Egyptian DNA
Posts: 42939 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I always speculated that YDNA J2 IS Levant/Turkey (not J1). At 12% looks like my hunch is right😊
Where is the origin of J2? IIRC J2 has a city/coastal dispersion . 12% matches 18% SNP?
-------------------- 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 |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: so xxyman, modern Egyptians are 88% African and only 12% i Ottoman Turk ?
I leave the additional article sources up to you.
I have explained my part, and so did others.
I am sure it was painful to read with I have posted, and it will come at handy when you post the additional article sources. I can assure you. Since ancient Egyptians arose form the South, those citations were particularly important. Since it manifested those regions.
"only 12% i Ottoman Turk", While you're at it , you may want to look up Ottoman Turk gene pool.
WE ARE NOW IN SEARCH OF UP AND DOWN STREAMS.
quote:The geographic location of Egypt, at the interface between North Africa, the Middle East, and southern Europe, prompted us to investigate the genetic diversity of this population and its relationship with neighboring populations. To assess the extent to which the modern Egyptian population reflects this intermediate geographic position, ten Unique Event Polymorphisms (UEPs), mapping to the nonrecombining portion of the Y chromosome, have been typed in 164 Y chromosomes from three North African populations. The analysis of these binary markers, which define 11 Y-chromosome lineages, were used to determine the haplogroup frequencies in Egyptians, Moroccan Arabs, and Moroccan Berbers and thereby define the Y-chromosome background in these regions. Pairwise comparisons with a set of 15 different populations from neighboring European, North African, and Middle Eastern populations and geographic analysis showed the absence of any significant genetic barrier in the eastern part of the Mediterranean area, suggesting that genetic variation and gene flow in this area follow the "isolation-by-distance" model. These results are in sharp contrast with the observation of a strong north-south genetic barrier in the western Mediterranean basin, defined by the Gibraltar Strait. Thus, the Y-chromosome gene pool in the modern Egyptian population reflects a mixture of European, Middle Eastern, and African characteristics, highlighting the importance of ancient and recent migration waves, followed by gene flow, in the region.
--Manni F1, Leonardi P, Barakat A, Rouba H, Heyer E, Klintschar M, McElreavey K, Quintana-Murci L.
Hum Biol. 2002 Oct;74(5):645-58.
Y-chromosome analysis in Egypt suggests a genetic regional continuity in Northeastern Africa.
Posts: 22243 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
@lioness. To be honest. No. I don't believe Pagani's 80% numbers. Why? For two reasons.
1. 80% implies almost total population replacement. Very unlikely. 2. We have to look at things holistically ie all inclusive. The SNP must corroborate the HG. Most modem Egyptians carry African lineage with an African origin. Male J2 is the only one with Turk/Levantine origin.
So. DNATRIBE numbers for SNP Is more in line with HG and not Pagani's. irregardless, modern Egytptians is the most admixed of modern North African populations!!!
Also, the sample size was unusually small. As one poster asked earlier. Who were the Egyptians sampled? If it were city dwellers vs tribesmen, then that would explain the 80% foreign material.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: @lioness. To be honest. No. I don't believe Pagani's 80% numbers. Why? For two reasons.
1. 80% implies almost total population replacement. Very unlikely. 2. We have to look at things holistically ie all inclusive. The SNP must corroborate the HG. Most modem Egyptians carry African lineage with an African origin. Male J2 is the only one with Turk/Levantine origin.
So. DNATRIBE numbers for SNP Is more in line with HG and not Pagani's. irregardless, modern Egytptians is the most admixed of modern North African populations!!!
It doesn't have to be a population replacement. It can be an increase of the segment (population of region wise). Most Egyptians life in urban areas like Cairo. These places also had most foreign people migrating there. Which is an historical fact.
posted
Agreed. The Turks simply had more babies is another possibility. But isn't that also a form of population replacement? But you get my point.
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor:
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: @lioness. To be honest. No. I don't believe Pagani's 80% numbers. Why? For two reasons.
1. 80% implies almost total population replacement. Very unlikely. 2. We have to look at things holistically ie all inclusive. The SNP must corroborate the HG. Most modem Egyptians carry African lineage with an African origin. Male J2 is the only one with Turk/Levantine origin.
So. DNATRIBE numbers for SNP Is more in line with HG and not Pagani's. irregardless, modern Egytptians is the most admixed of modern North African populations!!!
I dopen t have to be a population replacement. It can be an increase go the segment.
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Agreed. The Turks simply had more babies is another possibility. But isn't that also a form of population replacement? But you get my point.
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor:
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: @lioness. To be honest. No. I don't believe Pagani's 80% numbers. Why? For two reasons.
1. 80% implies almost total population replacement. Very unlikely. 2. We have to look at things holistically ie all inclusive. The SNP must corroborate the HG. Most modem Egyptians carry African lineage with an African origin. Male J2 is the only one with Turk/Levantine origin.
So. DNATRIBE numbers for SNP Is more in line with HG and not Pagani's. irregardless, modern Egytptians is the most admixed of modern North African populations!!!
I dopen t have to be a population replacement. It can be an increase go the segment.
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor:
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Agreed. The Turks simply had more babies is another possibility. But isn't that also a form of population replacement? But you get my point.
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor:
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: @lioness. To be honest. No. I don't believe Pagani's 80% numbers. Why? For two reasons.
1. 80% implies almost total population replacement. Very unlikely. 2. We have to look at things holistically ie all inclusive. The SNP must corroborate the HG. Most modem Egyptians carry African lineage with an African origin. Male J2 is the only one with Turk/Levantine origin.
So. DNATRIBE numbers for SNP Is more in line with HG and not Pagani's. irregardless, modern Egytptians is the most admixed of modern North African populations!!!
I dopen t have to be a population replacement. It can be an increase go the segment.
Yes, you can consider that population replacement as well.
It's also the most logical explanation. Considering the statistics on population density.
44% of the population is urban (36,713,659 people in 2014).
The population more than tripled since the 1950. Going from 25,000,000 to 84,627,891. Centuries ago it was way smaller, only a few million.
This source also shows the Sinai.
Migrants
Of course you are absolutely correct. But these scientists play games with the facts and will sample a few people in Cairo and claim that those samples represent "all Egypt". Never will you see samples of people from different parts of Egypt just to compare the dna results between populations WITHIN the country. Obviously the DNA of folks closer to Aswan will be different to those closer to Israel. And the DNA of he bedouins in the Sinai different from the Siwa folks in the West of the country. So there would be different clusters of DNA reflecting different population histories in different parts of the country. Not to mention the DNA for folks like the Bedja nomads in Upper Egypt. And this is not acceptable for so-called scientists in the year 2015 to be playing these games where even a lowly non scientific layman can call them on their BS.
But of course this is the whole point. To promote such BS as 'scientific' when it is only really just irrelevant data used to reinforce the nonsense arguments put forward by idiots online who want to pretend to know what they are talking about.
Just think about this and you will see how OBVIOUSLY intentional it is that they DON'T do a comprehensive DNA study across Egypt or ANY North African country. Egypt has been long the site of much European research since Napoleon. It has been debated over in terms of the origins of the ancient Egyptians for hundreds of years. Not to mention it has been identified as one of the routes for humans out of Africa. Yet to this day you don't have a comprehensive study of the DNA across the various population across the entire country. Yet you will keep seeing studies comparing Egyptian DNA, other North African DNA, European and Arab DNA all over the net. So how does that make sense if it isn't intentional. If all populations in Egypt don't have the same DNA cluster then which population are you using as the basis for comparison? And given the population changes over the last 50 years, what does that say about the DNA clusters of folks in Cairo vs isolated population still in and around Aswan or Siwa or in various desert communities? Obviously they don't care about that because they just want to claim that Europeans are close to the ancient Egyptians which is nonsense. The population density maps of ancient Egypt would have been exactly the opposite of what you have today which means the DNA clusters would have been totally different.
Posts: 8897 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
This sounds like a response from someone who has never studied anything about the internal migration patterns within Egypt. The great majority of the people in Cairo and Alexandria migrated from the villages to those bigger cities. So, basically, a big city like Cairo has people from all over Egypt, North (Delta Farmers), Upper Egypt, Aswan, Nubians, Gypsies, Bedouins, Copts, and many others. Almost every Egyptian ethnic group has some relatives that live and work in Cairo.
The scientists are actually very smart people and know what they're doing and most of the facts point to a differentiated North African Population that had close affinities to Eurasian before Ancient Egypt, During Ancient Egypt's Dynastic Era, and the same pattern seems to hold true in Modern Egypt as well.
You're upset, because they're Not Related to West Africans. But reasonable People should be able to connect the dots and stop believing in Santa Claus.
quote: Of course you are absolutely correct. But these scientists play games with the facts and will sample a few people in Cairo and claim that those samples represent "all Egypt". Never will you see samples of people from different parts of Egypt just to compare the dna results between populations WITHIN the country. Obviously the DNA of folks closer to Aswan will be different to those closer to Israel. And the DNA of he bedouins in the Sinai different from the Siwa folks in the West of the country. So there would be different clusters of DNA reflecting different population histories in different parts of the country. Not to mention the DNA for folks like the Bedja nomads in Upper Egypt. And this is not acceptable for so-called scientists in the year 2015 to be playing these games where even a lowly non scientific layman can call them on their BS.
But of course this is the whole point. To promote such BS as 'scientific' when it is only really just irrelevant data used to reinforce the nonsense arguments put forward by idiots online who want to pretend to know what they are talking about.
Just think about this and you will see how OBVIOUSLY intentional it is that they DON'T do a comprehensive DNA study across Egypt or ANY North African country. Egypt has been long the site of much European research since Napoleon. It has been debated over in terms of the origins of the ancient Egyptians for hundreds of years. Not to mention it has been identified as one of the routes for humans out of Africa. Yet to this day you don't have a comprehensive study of the DNA across the various population across the entire country. Yet you will keep seeing studies comparing Egyptian DNA, other North African DNA, European and Arab DNA all over the net. So how does that make sense if it isn't intentional. If all populations in Egypt don't have the same DNA cluster then which population are you using as the basis for comparison? And given the population changes over the last 50 years, what does that say about the DNA clusters of folks in Cairo vs isolated population still in and around Aswan or Siwa or in various desert communities? Obviously they don't care about that because they just want to claim that Europeans are close to the ancient Egyptians which is nonsense. The population density maps of ancient Egypt would have been exactly the opposite of what you have today which means the DNA clusters would have been totally different.
So you're saying that regardless of whether the randomly selected sample of 100 in the Pagani study was chosen in Lower Egypt, they would still be representative of the country's population?
You do remember that the average non-African ancestry of the 100 was 80%, don't you?
quote: The great majority of the people in Cairo and Alexandria migrated from the villages to those bigger cities. So, basically, a big city like Cairo has people from all over Egypt, North (Delta Farmers), Upper Egypt, Aswan, Nubians, Gypsies, Bedouins, Copts, and many others. Almost every Egyptian ethnic group has some relatives that live and work in Cairo.
posted
@Swenet. ??? DNAconclutant and their games...hit me up.
I will walk you through it. Only TWO STR is gives you a preliminary indication of geographic origin. Want me to explain it to you. I did it before but you probably forgot....
=== The genetic characteristics of these loci, such as chromosomal locations, repeat motifs, range of repeat sizes commonly found in different populations, are available in the product brochures of the commercial kits currently validated for such purposes [6, 7]. Several features are clear from the summary characteristics of these STR loci. First, all but two of the 13 STR loci are located on different chromosomes. The two (CSF1PO and D5S818) that are located on the same chromosome are also far apart (CSF1PO is localized to 5q33.3-34 and D5S818 to 5q23.3-32).
posted
Oh! and BOTH STR and SNP agree. indigenous North Africans are just as African as West Africans(Aframs). Notice..Egyptians were NOT included. So, eyeballing does NOT work.
-------------------- 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 |
quote:Originally posted by Caveman: This sounds like a response from someone who has never studied anything about the internal migration patterns within Egypt. The great majority of the people in Cairo and Alexandria migrated from the villages to those bigger cities. So, basically, a big city like Cairo has people from all over Egypt, North (Delta Farmers), Upper Egypt, Aswan, Nubians, Gypsies, Bedouins, Copts, and many others. Almost every Egyptian ethnic group has some relatives that live and work in Cairo.
The scientists are actually very smart people and know what they're doing and most of the facts point to a differentiated North African Population that had close affinities to Eurasian before Ancient Egypt, During Ancient Egypt's Dynastic Era, and the same pattern seems to hold true in Modern Egypt as well.
You're upset, because they're Not Related to West Africans. But reasonable People should be able to connect the dots and stop believing in Santa Claus.
quote: Of course you are absolutely correct. But these scientists play games with the facts and will sample a few people in Cairo and claim that those samples represent "all Egypt". Never will you see samples of people from different parts of Egypt just to compare the dna results between populations WITHIN the country. Obviously the DNA of folks closer to Aswan will be different to those closer to Israel. And the DNA of he bedouins in the Sinai different from the Siwa folks in the West of the country. So there would be different clusters of DNA reflecting different population histories in different parts of the country. Not to mention the DNA for folks like the Bedja nomads in Upper Egypt. And this is not acceptable for so-called scientists in the year 2015 to be playing these games where even a lowly non scientific layman can call them on their BS.
But of course this is the whole point. To promote such BS as 'scientific' when it is only really just irrelevant data used to reinforce the nonsense arguments put forward by idiots online who want to pretend to know what they are talking about.
Just think about this and you will see how OBVIOUSLY intentional it is that they DON'T do a comprehensive DNA study across Egypt or ANY North African country. Egypt has been long the site of much European research since Napoleon. It has been debated over in terms of the origins of the ancient Egyptians for hundreds of years. Not to mention it has been identified as one of the routes for humans out of Africa. Yet to this day you don't have a comprehensive study of the DNA across the various population across the entire country. Yet you will keep seeing studies comparing Egyptian DNA, other North African DNA, European and Arab DNA all over the net. So how does that make sense if it isn't intentional. If all populations in Egypt don't have the same DNA cluster then which population are you using as the basis for comparison? And given the population changes over the last 50 years, what does that say about the DNA clusters of folks in Cairo vs isolated population still in and around Aswan or Siwa or in various desert communities? Obviously they don't care about that because they just want to claim that Europeans are close to the ancient Egyptians which is nonsense. The population density maps of ancient Egypt would have been exactly the opposite of what you have today which means the DNA clusters would have been totally different.
Statistics and historical accounts tell otherwise. LOL
So does anthropology. The Northern populations is mainly intermediate, while more to the /south they get tropical adapted in limb ratio and body portions as did ancient Egyptians. This is why we know what you post it a hoax. LOL
44% of the population is urban (36,713,659 people in 2014).
The population more than tripled since the 1950. Going from 25,000,000 to 84,627,891. Centuries ago it was way smaller, only a few million.
posted
Egypt is far from homogenous but at the current rate of growth and the way populations are being moved out of their ancient ancestral homelands, it will soon be homogenous and the original indigenous element wiped out. Of course Europeans would be none the happier.
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor:
The population more than tripled since the 1950. Going from 25,000,000 to 84,627,891.
So what, they had a high fertility rate that is not relevant to ancestry unless it's primarily due to immigration which it's not
Posts: 42939 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic