quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Okay Doug. When ancient Egyptian aDNA drops we'll see whose posts have become dated and whose post can still be quoted.
And when they drop, just remember that you said Basal Eurasian is mixed. I'm going to hold you to that.
I didn't say this. The Nature article said this. That is the point. We are debating words and labels being used by other folks.
Man you guys....
Neanderthal inbreeding has left humans WEAKER: Non-Africans have lower fitness levels due to 'genetic burden' left by ancient relatives
quote:Basal Eurasian ancestry explains the reduced Neanderthal admixture in West Eurasians.
Again, I MYSELF am saying that this "reduced Neanderthal" mixture is a result of African DNA in EEF. "Basal Eurasian" is a stupid label that is used to obscure that simple fact.
Further to the point, in any scenario of determining the presence of African DNA and NON African DNA lineages one of the keys is the presence of Neanderthal mixture which would indicate Non African populations......
Simple really.
quote: Genetic analysis has revealed that mutations built up in Neanderthal DNA over time, due to inbreeding.
The accumulation of genetic errors meant their ability to have children was reduced by up to 40 per cent.
Interbreeding with humans passwed on some of the genes, with some people today still carrying a small proportion of the mutations
This may reduce reproductive fitness of non-African people today by 1 per cent.
Indigenous sub-Saharan Africans have been found to have no Neanderthal DNA, as their ancestors did not follow the same migration route.
posted
Okay Doug. You never said that "Basal Eurasian was never really in Africa". Nature magazine said it. Lol.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Okay Doug. You never said that "Basal Eurasian was never really in Africa". Nature magazine said it. Lol.
"Basal Eurasian" is a theoretical construct identified among MIXED populations of Early European Farmers as said explicitly in the Nature article. But sure you will keep claiming I made this up.....
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
They're saying 50,000 years ago West Eurasians and East Eurasians split from an ancestral ("Basal") Eurasian population in the Near-East. The problem with this is fossils. So-called AMH fossils in China are over 100,000 years old (this claim has been in Chinese paleo-anthropology literature since the 1980s and now is confirmed by a recent discovery: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v526/n7575/abs/nature15696.html
So someone needs to explain how there was "Basal Eurasian" ancestral population/lineage ~50kya, when so-called AMH were in China 100,000+ years ago, but so-called AMH were only 50,000 years ago in Near-East. Was the "Basal" Eurasian homeland China? None of this is a problem for me since I don't cling to Out of Africa dogma.
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
The genetic structure of the world's first farmers
Iosif Lazaridis, 2016
quote:
We show that the earliest populations of the Near East derived around half their ancestry from a ‘Basal Eurasian’ lineage that had little if any Neanderthal admixture and that separated from other non-African lineages prior to their separation from each other. The first farmers of the southern Levant (Israel and Jordan) and Zagros Mountains (Iran) were strongly genetically differentiated, and each descended from local hunter-gatherers. By the time of the Bronze Age, these two populations and Anatolian-related farmers had mixed with each other and with the hunter-gatherers of Europe to drastically reduce genetic differentiation. The impact of the Near Eastern farmers extended beyond the Near East: farmers related to those of Anatolia spread westward into Europe; farmers related to those of the Levant spread southward into East Africa; farmers related to those from Iran spread northward into the Eurasian steppe; and people related to both the early farmers of Iran and to the pastoralists of the Eurasian steppe spread eastward into South Asia.
no affinity of Natufians to sub-Saharan Africans is evident in our genome-wide analysis, as present-day sub-Saharan Africans do not share more alleles with Natufians than with other ancient Eurasians (Extended Data Table 1).
(We could not test for a link to present-day North Africans, who owe most of their ancestry to back-migration from Eurasia The idea of Natufians as a vector for the movement of Basal Eurasian ancestry into the Near East is also not supported by our data, as the Basal Eurasian ancestry in the Natufians (44±8%) is consistent with stemming from the same population as that in the Neolithic and Mesolithic populations of Iran, and is not greater than in those populations (Supplementary Information, section 4). Further insight into the origins and legacy of the Natufians could come from comparison to Natufians from additional sites, and to ancient DNA from north Africa.
"Basal Eurasian" is a theoretical construct identified among MIXED populations of Early European Farmers as said explicitly in the Nature article. But sure you will keep claiming I made this up.....
Basal was never really in Africa. It is a composite of multiple lineages. The ONLY reason this composite group is significant is primarily because of the African component which indicates a pattern of migration which introduced a survival toolkit that would lead to the development of farming.
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro:
Basal Eurasian is hardly a "Composite" group, it seems so because of the supposed different groups which received contribution from them.
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
You just contradicted yourself. Composite means composed of different groups. So where is the disagreement? And that is precisely what I said.
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro:
Above, which group is composite? the one receiving(b), or the one contributing(a)?
Shared drift with the neolithic levant, Iran and Natufian Groups is the component Identified as Basal Eurasian, if you haven't realized...
{...}
Honestly I also kinda feel like I'm being taken for a ride, I mean, I don't feel like I'm having the same discussion I was 2-3 posts ago... [...]
posted
I knew it. All Lioness' arguments can be dismissed easily. I don't know why you were scared to answer the question. I'm not going to debate you. What I look like asking your opinion and then quarrel over it? But the point is you can't come with valid reasons why you think that. That is all I wanted to know.
Either you mistakenly think your arguments are valid, or you know they're not valid and you're simply biased and want them to be valid.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
The genetic structure of the world's first farmers
Iosif Lazaridis, 2016
quote:
We show that the earliest populations of the Near East derived around half their ancestry from a ‘Basal Eurasian’ lineage that had little if any Neanderthal admixture and that separated from other non-African lineages prior to their separation from each other. The first farmers of the southern Levant (Israel and Jordan) and Zagros Mountains (Iran) were strongly genetically differentiated, and each descended from local hunter-gatherers. By the time of the Bronze Age, these two populations and Anatolian-related farmers had mixed with each other and with the hunter-gatherers of Europe to drastically reduce genetic differentiation. The impact of the Near Eastern farmers extended beyond the Near East: farmers related to those of Anatolia spread westward into Europe; farmers related to those of the Levant spread southward into East Africa; farmers related to those from Iran spread northward into the Eurasian steppe; and people related to both the early farmers of Iran and to the pastoralists of the Eurasian steppe spread eastward into South Asia.
no affinity of Natufians to sub-Saharan Africans is evident in our genome-wide analysis, as present-day sub-Saharan Africans do not share more alleles with Natufians than with other ancient Eurasians (Extended Data Table 1).
(We could not test for a link to present-day North Africans, who owe most of their ancestry to back-migration from Eurasia The idea of Natufians as a vector for the movement of Basal Eurasian ancestry into the Near East is also not supported by our data, as the Basal Eurasian ancestry in the Natufians (44±8%) is consistent with stemming from the same population as that in the Neolithic and Mesolithic populations of Iran, and is not greater than in those populations (Supplementary Information, section 4). Further insight into the origins and legacy of the Natufians could come from comparison to Natufians from additional sites, and to ancient DNA from north Africa.
Amazing how you skipped this part:
—Lazaridis et al. (2016)
quote: Second, we observed that all three Natufian individuals that could be assigned to a specific haplogroup belonged to haplogroup E1b1. This is thought to have an East African origin, and a 4,500-year old individual from the Ethiopian highlands 13 belonged to it.
[...]
"Previously, the West Eurasian population known to be the best proxy for this ancestry was present-day Sardinians, who resemble Neolithic Europeans genetically.
However, our analysis shows that East African ancestry is significantly better modelled by Levantine early farmers than by Anatolian or early European farmers, implying that the spread of this ancestry to East Africa was not from the same group that spread Near Eastern ancestry into Europe (Extended 283 Data Fig. 4; Supplementary Information, section 8)" [p. 9].
--Lazaridis et al.,
The genetic structure of the world's first farmers, bioRxiv preprint, posted June 16, 2016, doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/059311Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
The genetic structure of the world's first farmers
Iosif Lazaridis, 2016
quote:
We show that the earliest populations of the Near East derived around half their ancestry from a ‘Basal Eurasian’ lineage that had little if any Neanderthal admixture and that separated from other non-African lineages prior to their separation from each other. The first farmers of the southern Levant (Israel and Jordan) and Zagros Mountains (Iran) were strongly genetically differentiated, and each descended from local hunter-gatherers. By the time of the Bronze Age, these two populations and Anatolian-related farmers had mixed with each other and with the hunter-gatherers of Europe to drastically reduce genetic differentiation. The impact of the Near Eastern farmers extended beyond the Near East: farmers related to those of Anatolia spread westward into Europe; farmers related to those of the Levant spread southward into East Africa; farmers related to those from Iran spread northward into the Eurasian steppe; and people related to both the early farmers of Iran and to the pastoralists of the Eurasian steppe spread eastward into South Asia.
…
So, lionel when are you going to accept this?
Why run, negresses?
quote:HAPLOGROUP L2A1
Haplogroup L2a1 was found in two specimens from the Southern Levant Pre-Pottery Neolithic B site at Tell Halula, Syria, dating from the period between ca. 9600 and ca. 8000 BP or 7500 - 6000 BCE.[13]
—Fernández, E. et al., MtDNA analysis of ancient samples from Castellón (Spain): Diachronic variation and genetic relationships, International Congress Series, vol. 1288 (April 2006), pp. 127-129.
quote: The Mushabian culture (alternately, Mushabi or Mushabaean) is an Archaeological culture suggested to have originated east of the Levantine Rift Valley c. 14,000 BC in the Middle Epipaleolithic period.[1][2] Although the Mushabian industry was once thought to have originated in the Nile Valley it is now known to have originated in the previous lithic industries of the Levant.
[...]
Ricaut et al. (2008)[13] associate the Sub-Saharan influences detected in the Natufian samples with the migration of E1b1b lineages from East Africa to the Levant; and then into Europe.
quote: Among other groups, the Negroes and Baluch mulattoes of Baluchistan, which now forms part of West Pakistan, are of great interest to students of race and ethnic relations.
Negroes in West Pakistan are called Makranis.
[...]
Professor S. K. Chatterji, the Indian linguist, discussing the basic unity underlying the diversity of culture in India, also supports this view. According to him, "the first people to arrive in India were a Negrito or Negroid race from Africa, coming at a very early period by way of Arabia and the coastline of Iran. They spread over western and southern India, and even passed on to the northeastern part of the country . . .
Makranis, the Negroes of West Pakistan John B. Edlefsen, Khalida Shah and Mohsin Farooq Phylon (1960-) Vol. 21, No. 2 (2nd Qtr., 1960), pp. 124-130 Published by: Clark Atlanta University DOI: 10.2307/274335 Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/274335 Page Count: 7
Genomic Diversity: Applications in Human Population Genetics (1999, 2012)
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Swenet, is there a Lazaridis quote that explicitly states the geographical location of "non-African" ? Is it safe to assume that "non-African" were people who lived outside Africa exclusively? That seems logical by the title
quote:Dataset preparation for population genetic analyses Genotypes were called in GD13a at sites which overlapped those in the Human Origins dataset (Lazaridis et al.17, filtered as described in Jones et al.24) using GATK Pileup44.
quote: The site has been directly dated to 9650)9950 calBP (11), showing intense occupation over two to three centuries. The economy of the population has been shown to be that of pastoralists, focusing on goats (11). Archaeobotanical evidence is limited (16) but the evidence present is for two)row barley, probably wild, and no evidence for wheat, rye or other domesticates. In other words the overall economy is divergent from the classic agricultural mode of cereal agriculture found in the Levant, Anatolia and Northern Mesopotamian basin.
[…]
We compared GD13a with a number of other ancient genomes and modern populations (6, 17–29), using principal component analysis (PCA) (30), ADMIXTURE (31) and outgroup f3 statistics (32) (Fig. 1). GD13a did not cluster with any other early Neolithic individual from Eurasia in any of the analyses. ADMIXTURE and outgroup f3 identified Caucasus Hunter)Gatherers of Western Georgia, just north of the Zagros mountains, as the group genetically most similar to GD13a (Fig. 1B&C), whilst PCA also revealed some affinity with modern Central South Asian populations such as Balochi, Makrani and Brahui (Fig. 1A and Fig. S4). Also genetically close to GD13a were ancient samples from Steppe populations (Yamanya & Afanasievo) that were part of one or more Bronze age migrations into Europe, as well as early Bronze age cultures in that continent (Corded Ware) (17, 23), in line with previous relationships observed for the Caucasus Hunter)Gatherers (26).
[...]
Figure Legends:
Fig. 1. GD13a appears to be related to Caucasus Hunter Gatherers and to modern South Asian populations.
A) PCA loaded on modern populations (represented by open symbols). Ancient individuals (solid symbols) are projected onto these axes.
B) Outgroup f3(X, GD13a; Dinka), where Caucasus Hunter Gatherers (Kotias and Satsurblia) share the most drift with GD13a. Ancient samples have filled circles whereas modern populations are represented by empty symbols.
C) ADMIXTURE using K=17, where GD13a appears very similar to Caucasus Hunter Gatherers, and to a lesser extent to modern south Asian populations.
The mitochondria of GD13a (91.74X) was assigned to haplogroup X, most likely to the subhaplogroup X2. Haplogroup X2 is present in modern populations from Europe, the Near East, Western and Central Asia, North and East Africa, Siberia, and North America (7). Haplogroup X2 has been associated with an early expansion from the Near East (7, 8) and has been found in early Neolithic samples from Anatolia (9), Hungary (10) and Germany (11).
quote:S5. Principal component analysis shows that Southern Asian populations are the closest contemporary populations to the Iranian herder GD13a was placed close to the Southern Asian samples, specifically between the Balochi, Makrani and Brahui populations of South Asia. (Fig. S4). Of the ancient samples, GD13a falls closest to hunter-gatherers from the Caucasus (Fig. S4).
quote: S7. Outgroup f3 statistics show that GD13a shares the most genetic drift with Caucasus Hunter-gatherers
We used outgroup f3-statistics to estimate the amount of shared drift between GD13a and contemporary populations. This was performed on the dataset described in section S6 using the qp3Pop program in the ADMIXTOOLS package (13). We computed f3(X, GD13a; Dinka), where X represents a modern population and Dinka, an African population equally related to Eurasians, acts as an outgroup (Fig. S7). We also repeated this analysis where X represents ancient individuals/populations. Among the ancient populations, Caucasus hunter-gatherers (Kotias and Satsurblia) have the closest affinity to GD13a (Table S3), followed by other ancient individuals from Steppe populations from the Bronze age and modern populations from the Caucasus.
—M. Gallego-Llorente,
The genetics of an early Neolithic pastoralist from the Zagros, Iran
That's what's so disturbing. Not even a fair shake. We're just going to use that "no special affinity to SSA groups" and a superficial "non-African" label as having the last word. That's what I wanted to know.
That's what's so disturbing. Not even a fair shake. We're just going to use that "no special affinity to SSA groups" and a superficial "non-African" label as having the last word. That's what I wanted to know.
It becomes remarkable when you start putting the pieces of the puzzle together.
quote:From various kinds of evidence it can now be argued that agriculture in Ethiopia and the Horn was quite ancient, originating as much as 7,000 or more years ago, and that its development owed nothing to South Arabian inspiration. Moreover, the inventions of grain cultivation in particular, both in Ethiopia and separately in the Near East, seem rooted in a single, still earlier subsistence invention of North-east Africa, the intensive utilization of wild grains, beginning probably by or before 13,000 b.c. The correlation of linguistic evidence with archaeology suggests that this food-collecting innovation may have been the work of early Afroasiatic-speaking communities and may have constituted the particular economic advantage which gave impetus to the first stages of Afroasiatic expansion into Ethiopia and the Horn, the Sahara and North Africa, and parts of the Near East.
posted
I'm just repotting what the conclusions of Lazaridis are and what his intent is when HE says "Basal Eurasian" If anybody has a problem with that. It is a problem with him, with out of all the models he reviewed the one he choose and conclusions he made in the article.
So if you use the term "Basal Eurasian" it is coming out of HIS model. If you don't agree with it, you should not use the term "Basal Eurasian" which HE clearly meant to be non-African.
So if you think Basal Eurasians are really African it makes no sense to use such a term, obviously ! You need to find a term that makes sense.
Then you will have to explain who the first non-Africans were and where they lived
So as usual Ish Gebor, you have all sorts of problems with these articles and you are alway too scared to blame them. You blame it all on me, as if I wrote these papers.
The chart that came out of the Lazaridis paper is central to his intent. It is the theme of the whole paper and came out of reviewing many other models as we can see in the pdf
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: I'm just repotting what the conclusions of Lazaridis are and what his intent is when HE says "Basal Eurasian" If anybody has a problem with that. It is a problem with him, with out of all the models he reviewed the one he choose and conclusions he made in the article.
So if you use the term "Basal Eurasian" it is coming out of HIS model. If you don't agree with it, you should not use the term "Basal Eurasian" which HE clearly meant to be non-African.
So if you think Basal Eurasians are really African it makes no sense to use such a term, obviously ! You need to find a term that makes sense.
Then you will have to explain who the first non-Africans were and where they lived
So as usual Ish Gebor, you have all sorts of problems with these articles and you are alway too scared to blame them. You blame it all on me, as if I wrote these papers.
The chart that came out of the Lazaridis paper is central to his intent. It is the theme of the whole paper and came out of reviewing many other models as we can see in the pdf
So negresse, explain why didn't "report" this part of the paper:
quote: Second, we observed that all three Natufian individuals that could be assigned to a specific haplogroup belonged to haplogroup E1b1. This is thought to have an East African origin, and a 4,500-year old individual from the Ethiopian highlands 13 belonged to it.
[...]
"Previously, the West Eurasian population known to be the best proxy for this ancestry was present-day Sardinians, who resemble Neolithic Europeans genetically.
However, our analysis shows that East African ancestry is significantly better modelled by Levantine early farmers than by Anatolian or early European farmers, implying that the spread of this ancestry to East Africa was not from the same group that spread Near Eastern ancestry into Europe (Extended 283 Data Fig. 4; Supplementary Information, section 8)" [p. 9].
—Lazaridis et al.,
Wy you keep running away, negresse?
No one but you is talking about blame, negresse. We are analyzing here, negresse.
You are the only one here on this website who takes papers in on automatic-pilot (as the ultimate truth). Since you lack the skill to verify data and connect dots, negresse!
E1b1 (E-P2)
quote:
The proto-Afro-Asiatic group carrying the E-P2 mutation may have appeared at this point in time and subsequently gave rise to the different major population groups including current speakers of the Afro-Asiatic languages and pastoralist populations.
[…]
Y-chromosome haplogroup tree
All the analyses in this study were done at the same resolution using the following 17 bi-allelic markers: E-M96, E-M33, E-P2, E-M2, E-M58, E-M191, E-M154, E-M329, E-M215, E-M35, E-M78, E-M81, E-M123, E-M34, E-V6, E-V16/E-M281 and E-M75.
[…]
The network cluster associated with the Eritrean Nilo-Saharan Kunama (Figure 1) may represent an expansion event following the out-of-Africa migration,31, 46 possibly close to the origin of the ancestral Y-chromosome clades.47, 48, 49 The expansion, carrying the diversified E-P2 mutation, may be responsible for the migration of male populations to different parts of the continent and henceforth the rise and spread of the bearers of the macrohaplogroup.50 These type of population movements, or demic expansions, driven by climatic change and/or spread of pastoralism and to some extent agriculture,51, 52, 53, 54 are not uncommon in human history. This scenario is more substantiated by the refining of the E-P2 (Trombetta et al35) and its two basal clades E-M2 and E-M329, which are believed to be prevalent exclusively in Western Africa and Eastern Africa, respectively.
[…]
The network result put North African populations like the Saharawi, Morocco Berbers and Arabs in a separate cluster. Given the proposed origin of Maghreb ancestors56, 57, 58, 59 in North Africa, our network dating suggested a divergence of North Western African populations from Eastern African as early as 32 000 YBP, which is close to the estimated dates to the origin of E-P2 macrohaplogroup.
—Eyoab I Gebremeskel1,2 and Muntaser E Ibrahim
Y-chromosome E haplogroups: their distribution and implication to the origin of Afro-Asiatic languages and pastoralism EJHGOpen
European Journal of Human Genetics (2014) 22, 1387–1392; doi:10.1038/ejhg.2014.41; published online 26 March 2014
Something smells funny in here, is it you?
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
Of course you follow the rules of your blog, and the blog is yours, but permit me to say that I think it is wrong to delete the posts of xyyman. First of all because he is on the same plane of Open Genomes: "I am just educating the ignorant" he says, and don't you remember what OG wrote? Secondly because I may assure you that xyyman is a clever boy. If he were less knowledgeable he could be one of the Maghrebins who put bombs in our cities. It is well that he may speak. Beyond that there is the abyss not different from that of all the PhDs you take in great consideration. Look at this image, and everything will be clear: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~stewartroyal/r1broutes.png
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
He had my attention until he revealed his anti-Maghreb bias out the blue and called you a clever "boy". Given how that term has been used historically by Europeans, I don't know why you think that's so flattering. Don't get me started on that link (did they really use heart shapes? smh).
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sweetness. The point is, readers catching on even my adversaries.
Now Davidski is going back and is censoring my posts. He deleted one entire thread already because of me. lol!. White people don't like to look stupid to black people. Don't you get that? SMH
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ok I'll give my two cents. Ancient ancestry has an African bias. The race of albinos is so young, that to identify themselves genetically requires that they look identify a handful of recent mutations that dont show up strong in ancient test. These test are not deep enough to trace OoA ancestry beyond haplogroups like R1, R1b, and a few others which are still a minority among the ancient multitude. Thus , this quote
quote: “analyses reveal that ancient Egyptians shared more Near Eastern ancestry than present-day Egyptians, who received additional Sub-Saharan admixture in more recent times. This analysis establishes ancient Egyptian mummies as a genetic source to study ancient human history and offers the perspective of deciphering Egypt’s past at a genome-wide level.
Is the title of Dave Chappele's new comedy special. The Age of Spin. The real debate is about the language families not blog rhetoric.
Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Sweetness. The point is, readers catching on even my adversaries.
Now Davidski is going back and is censoring my posts. He deleted one entire thread already because of me. lol!. White people don't like to look stupid to black people. Don't you get that? SMH
I've seen so many examples of this. What did he delete?
Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
Deleted the thread on ancient connection between Nigerian dogs and Scandanavian dogs. I had about 15 post in that thread about the ancestral nature of West african dogs since many paper stated that Scandanavian dogs are north indigenous to Northern Europe. Sources cited.
Now he is deleting all my post once it does not fall in line to his belief.
Funny I did not know the connection between the dogs until the paper was posted. To my shocking surprise West African dogs carry all ancestral clades found in Asia and Europe. In addtion to their own. Even the dogs came from Africa.
Also surprising I found out that Villabruna man, 14000year old Italian was ancestral for black skin and had tropical body proportion. he also carried R1b!!! Baaaam!
-------------------- 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: Second, we observed that all three Natufian individuals that could be assigned to a specific haplogroup belonged to haplogroup E1b1. This is thought to have an East African origin, and a 4,500-year old individual from the Ethiopian highlands 13 belonged to it.
[...]
"Previously, the West Eurasian population known to be the best proxy for this ancestry was present-day Sardinians, who resemble Neolithic Europeans genetically.
However, our analysis shows that East African ancestry is significantly better modelled by Levantine early farmers than by Anatolian or early European farmers, implying that the spread of this ancestry to East Africa was not from the same group that spread Near Eastern ancestry into Europe (Extended 283 Data Fig. 4; Supplementary Information, section 8)" [p. 9].
—Lazaridis et al.,
Wy you keep running away, negresse?
No one but you is talking about blame, negresse. We are analyzing here, negresse.
You are the only one here on this website who takes papers in on automatic-pilot (as the ultimate truth). Since you lack the skill to verify data and connect dots, negresse!
E1b1 (E-P2)
quote:
The proto-Afro-Asiatic group carrying the E-P2 mutation may have appeared at this point in time and subsequently gave rise to the different major population groups including current speakers of the Afro-Asiatic languages and pastoralist populations.
[…]
Y-chromosome haplogroup tree
All the analyses in this study were done at the same resolution using the following 17 bi-allelic markers: E-M96, E-M33, E-P2, E-M2, E-M58, E-M191, E-M154, E-M329, E-M215, E-M35, E-M78, E-M81, E-M123, E-M34, E-V6, E-V16/E-M281 and E-M75.
[…]
The network cluster associated with the Eritrean Nilo-Saharan Kunama (Figure 1) may represent an expansion event following the out-of-Africa migration,31, 46 possibly close to the origin of the ancestral Y-chromosome clades.47, 48, 49 The expansion, carrying the diversified E-P2 mutation, may be responsible for the migration of male populations to different parts of the continent and henceforth the rise and spread of the bearers of the macrohaplogroup.50 These type of population movements, or demic expansions, driven by climatic change and/or spread of pastoralism and to some extent agriculture,51, 52, 53, 54 are not uncommon in human history. This scenario is more substantiated by the refining of the E-P2 (Trombetta et al35) and its two basal clades E-M2 and E-M329, which are believed to be prevalent exclusively in Western Africa and Eastern Africa, respectively.
[…]
The network result put North African populations like the Saharawi, Morocco Berbers and Arabs in a separate cluster. Given the proposed origin of Maghreb ancestors56, 57, 58, 59 in North Africa, our network dating suggested a divergence of North Western African populations from Eastern African as early as 32 000 YBP, which is close to the estimated dates to the origin of E-P2 macrohaplogroup.
—Eyoab I Gebremeskel1,2 and Muntaser E Ibrahim
Y-chromosome E haplogroups: their distribution and implication to the origin of Afro-Asiatic languages and pastoralism EJHGOpen
European Journal of Human Genetics (2014) 22, 1387–1392; doi:10.1038/ejhg.2014.41; published online 26 March 2014
Something smells funny in here, is it you?
--- --- --- ---
I see your point and many others being made using the same sources however I'm not sure or noone has made a clear cut connection for how it all makes sense in the first place. The east african genetic landscape will continue to be attributed to none African geneflow unless a model which challenges Lazaridis' surfaces. The reason for that is his interperation of the shared flow between some non African populations.
quote:Since we have in Mota an un-admixed African population, we can look for the origin of the West Eurasian backflow by modelling contemporary Ari as a mixture of Mota and possible source populations.
M. Llorente 2015
Mota is confirmed E-V329, Down stream clades are found on the Arabian peninsula.
10.1126/science.aad2879
^^The first principle component can be looked at as an Eurasian admixture coefficient by the way.^^
Multiple methods date "Near-Eastern" gene flow into East Africa within the last 5ky. which coincides well with the geographic landscape and influences from the desert. Where is the signal that'll suggest "Basal-Eurasian-like" geneflow of any sort was evident in East Africa Mid Holocene or late LGM?
There is a possibility that a Near eastern Neolithic related group could be responsible for the OOA signals in east africa, I believe Lazaridis even looked for it too, a ghost population that I brought up earlier. But given the circumstance that there's no Basal-Eurasian pre-backmigration levels of drift in east Africa, It'd mean that this "Ghost" population would have to be AT-Least in majority be related to the Mota, or Non-OOA east African.
Whatever be the case for the origin Basal Eurasian, it's development was undoubtedly precedent in isolate of east Africa. Otherwise Basal Eurasian as a population DOES NOT EXISTS. AND also... -Natufians are a genetic Isolate, related to an ancestral east African population. -Iran and Levant Neolithics received geneflow directly from east africa [which explains shared drift and higher SSA affinity] -The aforementioned East African pop[s]^ Carried Natufian or Natufian-like ancestry & the Aari recieved flow very recently. -Other early pre-Neolithic group[s] in isolate from East Africa [possibly from north Africa, who dafuq knows] was integrated into the later Near eastern Neolithics -^A related group of the same origin wasn't integrated into the Levantine genome, but contributed to European Neolithic expansions. -Xyyman was right all along. lol
- This is where Occam's razor shows up, for the biased or the rational.... But an explanation needs to be given.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
xyyman, where was Y-DNA haplogroup R before it split into R1 and R2?
(this, also, thousands of years before R1 split into R1a and R1b)
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Lazaridis never said his Basal Eurasian is not African. Also, he's a booster of Natufian partial African ancestry. Move beyond those qpGraphsthat show Mbuti <--> non-African split. Please, to patiently read Lazaridis 2013 preprint view of Natufians on p9 and p99.
...
quote: Nature mag's peer reviewed 2014 print on p411 "censored" and replaced what Lazaridis [2013 p9] originally said.
quote: But with the 2016 World's First Farmers preprint the public again gets to see what Lazaridis has to say on the "Africanity" of both the Basal Eurasian statistical model and the Natufian actual folks and culture (lines 154 - 199).
quote: I haven't seen the print version, so I can only wonder what the Peers did to Lazaridis this time.
While Lazaridis has no problem with any African origin of Basal EurAsian, or any African morphology and "tool kit" for Natufians, the academic community as represented by Nature's peers cling to the "morphologically undifferentiated" "Out of African".
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
"The Near East was the staging point for the peopling of Eurasia by anatomically modern humans."
- And yet AMH finds in China predate Near East; Out of Africa has so many holes in it. Its only politics keeping it alive in the west.
quote:The [African] replacement hypothesis proposes that “modern humans” evolved only in sub-Saharan Africa, through a speciation event rendering them unable to breed with other hominins. They then spread throughout Africa, then to Asia, Australia and finally to Europe, replacing all other humans by exterminating or out- competing them. In this critical analysis of the replacement hypothesis it is shown that it began as a hoax, later reinforced by false paleoanthropological claims and a series of flawed genetic propositions, yet it became almost universally accepted during the 1990s and has since dominated the discipline.
posted
Out of Africa theory came from a hoax, not many people know (unfortunately)-
"In 1973 Professor Reiner Protsch “von Zieten” proposed that modern humans arose in sub-Saharan Africa, presenting a series of false datings (Terberger & Street, 2003; Schulz, 2004) of presumed “modern” fossil specimens from Europe over the following years (Protsch, 1973, 1975; Protsch & Glowatzki, 1974; Protsch & Semmel, 1978; Henke & Pro- tsch, 1978). In 2003 it was shown that all of his datings had been concocted and he was dismissed by the University of Frankfurt. However, his idea had in the meantime been deve- loped into the “Afro-European sapiens” model (Bräuer, 1984), and a few years later the “African Eve” complete replacement scenario appeared (Cann et al., 1987; Stringer & Andrews, 1988; Mellars & Stringer, 1989)." (Bednarik, 2013)
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
posted
You don't have to lie why that thread was deleted. There is a cached version on google. You weren't "cracking" anything. You were getting the Amun Ra treatment.
You also have your priorities all the way messed up, talking about Nigerian dogs, R1b and Villabruna. That is the least of your concerns. How about "cracking" this:
quote:Originally posted by beyoku:
quote: Egypt, located on the isthmus of Africa, is an ideal region to study historical population dynamics due to its geographic location and documented interactions with ancient civilizations in Africa, Asia, and Europe. Particularly, in the first millennium BCE Egypt endured foreign domination leading to growing numbers of foreigners living within its borders possibly contributing genetically to the local population. Here we mtDNA and nuclear DNA from mummified humans recovered from Middle Egypt that span around 1,300 years of ancient Egyptian history from the Third Intermediate to the Roman Period. Our analyses reveal that ancient Egyptians shared more Near Eastern ancestry than present-day Egyptians, who received additional Sub-Saharan admixture in more recent times. This analysis establishes ancient Egyptian mummies as a genetic source to study ancient human history and offers the perspective of deciphering Egypt’s past at a genome-wide level.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: How about "cracking" this:
quote: Egypt, located on the isthmus of Africa, is an ideal region to study historical population dynamics due to its geographic location and documented interactions with ancient civilizations in Africa, Asia, and Europe. Particularly, in the first millennium BCE Egypt endured foreign domination leading to growing numbers of foreigners living within its borders possibly contributing genetically to the local population. Here we mtDNA and nuclear DNA from mummified humans recovered from Middle Egypt that span around 1,300 years of ancient Egyptian history from the Third Intermediate to the Roman Period. Our analyses reveal that ancient Egyptians shared more Near Eastern ancestry than present-day Egyptians, who received additional Sub-Saharan admixture in more recent times. This analysis establishes ancient Egyptian mummies as a genetic source to study ancient human history and offers the perspective of deciphering Egypt’s past at a genome-wide level.
Also surprising I found out that Villabruna man, 14000year old Italian was ancestral for black skin and had tropical body proportion. he also carried R1b!!! Baaaam! [/QB]
"Multivariate statistical analysis of craniofacial characteristics place Villabruna 1 close to Le Bichon 1, a geographically and chronologically nearby specimen, suggesting genetic affinity among the last hunter and gatherers from the alpine region" http://www.isita-org.com/jass/Contents/2008%20vol86/09_Vercelotti.pdf
Perhaps you misread Alpine for Africa.
Also, its post-cranial measurements/indices are closest to means of North Africans, not Sub-Saharan Africans:
"Intralimb indices of Villabruna 1 (RL/HL; TL/FL) provide values similar to those of the North African sample and intermediate between those exhibited by Sub-Saharan and European populations."
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
posted
Come on Swenet I got 4 racks on a Joseph Greenberg vs Jean Claude Mboli debate.
The Mboli crowed would do it for free. Where are my Greenbergers? Where is Team Osiris? I got 4 racks. 2 for both $ides.Lets get it in and stop bullsh1ting.
Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Mboli crowd had their run. It was fun while it lasted. But the aDNA shows they're completely out of touch with reality (no offense).
Once you're familiar with craniometrics you can SEE with your own eyes who is right. Just open a physical anthropology textbook and look up a picture of the average Badarian. There is no difference between the average Badarian and ancestral Semitic speakers. Something Mboli can't explain since he's part of a tradition that denies the latter's Africanity and places the former among far less related people.
This is why there is no Mboli supporter among physical anthropologists. Why do you think that is? A coincidence? You only have Mboli supporters where you can ignore the stuff that really matters (like what the ancient people look like) and where you can bask in the stuff that is at the absolute bottom of relevance (what language they spoke out of the many African languages).
I'm not knocking your efforts but it's not for me. I'm already one leg out this community. Just have some things remaining that need to be ticked off my list.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Google cached??? the thread was deleted by Davidski.
In fact he is deleting many of my post now. He doesn't like that I exposed that Villabruna carried ancestral alleles for SLC45A2 nd SLC24A5 ...just like Nigerians. Villabruna was closest to African and carried Tropical body proportions like Africans.
Villabruna was a black African from the Tropics.
As far as the dogs. I guess he did not like that I discovered and posted Scandinavian dogs are related to Nigerian dogs and mostly likely accompanied Villabruna(not literally of course). A man and his dog.
I did not realized that West Africa carry ALL ancestral haplotypes Of European and Asian dogs, implying that the domestication of the dog took place in Africa. I was shocked.
quote:Originally posted by DD'eDeN: Xyyman, where can I read your stuff about "basal" Nigerian Dogs?
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: The Mboli crowd had their run. It was fun while it lasted. But the aDNA shows they're completely out of touch with reality (no offense).
Once you're familiar with craniometrics you can SEE with your own eyes who is right. Just open a physical anthropology textbook and look up a picture of the average Badarian. There is no difference between the average Badarian and ancestral Semitic speakers. Something Mboli can't explain since he's part of a tradition that denies the latter's Africanity and places the former among far less related people.
This is why there is no Mboli supporter among physical anthropologists. Why do you think that is? A coincidence? You only have Mboli supporters where you can ignore the stuff that really matters (like what the ancient people look like) and where you can bask in the stuff that is at the absolute bottom of relevance (what language they spoke out of the many African languages).
I'm not knocking your efforts but it's not for me. I'm already one leg out this community. Just have some things remaining that need to be ticked off my list.
Id like to hear the one about aDNA.
Badarians seem too vague considering how diverse Semitic speakers are and shitty modern recreations are today. I look at it linguistics first, genetics second with anthropology a distant third. I'm least trusting of anthropology. One of my main issues with the Greenberg 'families' is it was admittedly based on Coon's dated/bias and at times nonsensical phenotype classes. Mboli's side is demonstrating linguistic and cultural relationships. Example https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3PfTpfj5PXQ
I'm not expecting you to take this debate Swenet I want you to find someone who can do Greenberg ahhh fuk Greenberg. I want someone who can challenge Mboli in the linguistics department. Genetics is a tie breaker and anthropology is damn near irrelevant.
As long as they have a better linguistics argument you have to make everything else fit. Its just like white people being a race of albinos. They straight up are a race of people who pass on albino mutations as a race of albinos would. Vitamin D and ultra violet rays have to fit under that paradigm.
Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
Your order of importance of scientific disciplines makes sense if you want to know about cultural stuff. Which there is nothing wrong with that. But if we're talking about population affinity, and the population is millennia removed from the ancestral language family (i.e. if it has had plenty of opportunity to change over time), linguistics is just like Sway. It aint got the answers.
Trust your own judgment.
An individual close to the average Badarian general phenotype on the left and on the righthand side there is an example of a Badarian on the other end of the spectrum:
The lefthand 'Badarian' (Tasian) phenotype is a variation of the phenotype that dominates the Badarian sample. Only this one happens to have an atypical broadish head (which is rare) and looks a bit more 'Mechtoid'. The Badarian on the right is how Mboli and Obenga are portraying ancient Egyptians, and this general phenotype represents a minority. Strouhal says it occurs with a frequency of 6.8%, but let's say it's 10% for the sake of argument (since you think there is a conspiracy).
Below is a similar 'Badarian type' in an ancient Nubian sample (see especially the individual on the right). I post this so no one can say someone is misrepresenting Badarians by making bs "Eurocentric" drawings. The same general phenotype is obviously a regular occurrence in Nubian samples, albeit this time seemingly without the broadish head:
Mboli is talking from a safe position where he doesn't have to deal with what he would perceive as harsh realities. Which is very unscientific. None of this is going to show up and when comparing the ancient Egyptian language with Niger-Congo languages, so he can deviate from the facts on the ground as much he wants. To debate Mboli et al you have to suspend disbelief and "play along" like all of this doesn't exist. But to each their own.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Xyyman, you saved none of your DNA Dog info? What breed is the Nigerian dog? Basenji? There is a disyrict in Congo near the Ituri rainforest named Basenji District.
posted
@Ddeden. No I did NOT save any of my post before the thread was deleted. I usual double post stuff worth saving on ESR. Too late. But I will dig up the paper.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Anyone with an above average understanding of genetic knows many of the post by Swenet is filled with "catch phrases " to give the impress he knows what he is talking about, Swenet is fast talking hustler. reminds of a pimp. I have come across them. But I give him credit with craniology.....maybevbecause I don't know enough in that field to filter through his "fast talking" bs.
xyyman is scared to use Amarna STRs on popaffiliator to prove that the Amarna family were transplants from South Africa or Great Lakes. I did the analysis. He rejected my analysis but was scared to redo it and prove me wrong.
xyyman is scared to post Natufian Fst values to prove they are what he says they are
xyyman is scared to address why Han Chinese are closer to Natufians
xyyman is scared to explain the relatively low frequency of Hpal 3,592 lineages in Fox 1997's Nubian sample
xyyman is scared to address the abstract posted in the OP of this thread beyond saying he's still right
xyyman is scared to address AE skeletal remains. When asked why they don't conform to his claims he says "plasticity"; he thinks AE are transplants from South Africa but with a North African craniofacial exterior. Lol.
Whenever xyyman is not running away from proving his claims, he's calling people "hindoo", "fraud", "crazy", "liars", "two-faced" or making 'I told you so' threads where he claims people agree with him, but they never do. Lol. You a funny dude. But don't pretend that you can shine Davidskis shoes on this subject. You got washed, bro. You didn't crack any skulls on that blog (at least not to my awareness). You live in your own world. And I'm willing to go easy on you and let you do you. But leave me out of your goofy threads, please.
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: @Ddeden. No I did save any of my post before the thread was deleted. I usual double post stuff worth saving on ESR. Too late. But I will dig up the paper.
So why don't you post the link to the cached thread? DD'eden is asking your for it, isn't he? I'm not going to post it because I'm not out to embarrass you, unless provoked. But given all your alternative facts about me and Davidski, why not put your money where your mouth is for once? Why not prove the thread was deleted because he is "crazy" and you were "overwhelming" him with facts?
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ahem! On the OP. I made my point clear at the onset. The abstract don’t mean dick without data. Some of these racialist geneticist uses Biaka/MButi to represent all of SSA when we know there is > 40,00years separating YRI and Mbuti. What population rthe OP used to represent SSA is important as of this point I have nothing to add. As I said. I don’t think the paper will ever be released like Beyoku’s. (wink)
You got “beat up” over your “Tribe Score” nonsense already and I am not going to repeat it.
Sage, You and I went through that who alleles diatribe already concern the Amarnas and their STR association. BOTH BOTH BOTH DNATribes and DNAConsultants agree that coellectively the Amarnas are SSA. So what is YOUR argument. I am not into “made-up” arguments.
But I agree I should leave your name out these threads unless it is warranted.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: @Ddeden. No I did save any of my post before the thread was deleted. I usual double post stuff worth saving on ESR. Too late. But I will dig up the paper.
So why don't you post the link to the cached thread? DD'eden is asking your for it, isn't he? I'm not going to post it because I'm not out to embarrass you, unless provoked. But given all your alternative facts about me and Davidski, why not put your money where your mouth is for once? Why not prove the thread was deleted because he is "crazy" and you were "overwhelming" him with facts?
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
When I searched for - eurogenes.blogspot.com/2017/03/north-european-and-west-african-dogs.html
I get
“Sorry, the page you were looking for in this blog does not exist.”
Papers are : A cryptic mitochondrial DNA link between North European and West African dogs - Adeniyi C . . Barking up the wrong tree: Modern northern European dogs fail to explain their origin - Helena Malmström*
Someone sent me the complete studies.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
BTW – Most of my post are being deleted by Davidski now. So too are some from OpenGenomes. Davidski are not interested in counter discussion. I see that now. As you can see some of his “regulars” are already calling for my ban. All it took was a few posts exposing their ignorance. Similar thing happened at FTDNA Forum. I was eventually banned. Now that site is dead.
Yes – The entire Scandinavian-West African dog thread is gone. About 50% of the posting was from me. Also most of my in debt post in other threads are gone? He left my “casual” replies. All the detailed stuff with citations is gone.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
To bad you couldn't save it and repost to reloaded because it sounds interesting to me.
Posts: 1123 | From: New York | Registered: Feb 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Your order of importance of scientific disciplines makes sense if you want to know about cultural stuff. Which there is nothing wrong with that. But if we're talking about population affinity, and the population is millennia removed from the ancestral language family (i.e. if it has had plenty of opportunity to change over time), linguistics is just like Sway. It aint got the answers.
Trust your own judgment.
An individual close to the average Badarian general phenotype on the left and on the righthand side there is an example of a Badarian on the other end of the spectrum:
The lefthand 'Badarian' (Tasian) phenotype is a variation of the phenotype that dominates the Badarian sample. Only this one happens to have an atypical broadish head (which is rare) and looks a bit more 'Mechtoid'. The Badarian on the right is how Mboli and Obenga are portraying ancient Egyptians, and this general phenotype represents a minority. Strouhal says it occurs with a frequency of 6.8%, but let's say it's 10% for the sake of argument (since you think there is a conspiracy).
Below is a similar 'Badarian type' in an ancient Nubian sample (see especially the individual on the right). I post this so no one can say someone is misrepresenting Badarians by making bs "Eurocentric" drawings. The same general phenotype is obviously a regular occurrence in Nubian samples, albeit this time seemingly without the broadish head:
Mboli is talking from a safe position where he doesn't have to deal with what he would perceive as harsh realities. Which is very unscientific. None of this is going to show up and when comparing the ancient Egyptian language with Niger-Congo languages, so he can deviate from the facts on the ground as much he wants. To debate Mboli et al you have to suspend disbelief and "play along" like all of this doesn't exist. But to each their own.
This is what I mean with the albinos. Linguist have noticed the ties to Niger Congo, Sumarian and Indo-European languages yet the Greenberg school argues that Niger Congo is much younger than the bulk OoA migrations. If Niger Congo is old enough to have a stronger genetic relationship with Afro-Asiatic languages then how relevant are oide 'sciences' and phenotypes? What difference would anthropology make?
B sides Mboli and Obenga are not portraying anyone. Mboli did a scratch reconstruction and showed his work independent of any obvious biases.
Greenberg on the other hand said - “Afroasiatic languages are spoken both by Caucasian and Negro peoples. The Cushites and EthiopianSemites are often classed as Caucasoids. The Egyptians, Berbers, and remaining Semitic people are indisputably Caucasian while Chad speakers are Negroid.”
This leads me to believe that he was trying to fit linguistics with dated dishonest psuedo-oide sciences. Its also telling from my perspective that Mboli's side is demonstrating and ready to debate while the Greenberg is mmhhhmm. You have any literary suggestions of their demonstrations?
Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes: Greenberg on the other hand said - “Afroasiatic languages are spoken both by Caucasian and Negro peoples. The Cushites and EthiopianSemites are often classed as Caucasoids. The Egyptians, Berbers, and remaining Semitic people are indisputably Caucasian while Chad speakers are Negroid.”
This leads me to believe that he was trying to fit linguistics with dated dishonest psuedo-oide sciences.
Greenberg may have had outdated ideas about what the AE and other Northeast African populations (assuming by "Egyptians" he was referring to the native AE). But that very quote goes to show you that he's not trying to correlate linguistic categories with "race". If anything, the message that I take away from that quote is that he's cautioning against a simplistic equation of language with biological affinity. How can you interpret a statement like "Afrasan is spoken by both 'Negro' and 'Caucasian' people" as correlating Afrasan with either of those old racial constructs.
Swenet is in a better position than I to explain why the Afrasan model fits all the data better than this proposed pan-African lingustic phylum. But what I want to ask again is why it should matter. The proto-Afrasan cradle is still located within Africa, most probably in Northeast Africa immediately south of Egypt (e.g. the northern Sudan). Even if you take pre-OOA into account, that doesn't make it any more "Caucasian" than it is, say, "Papuan".
Come to think of it, when you consider both the geographic and chronological proximity proto-Afrasan has to AE, I think it's reasonable to suppose most AE didn't look very different from the people occupying that area at that time. If any place in Africa is an ideal candidate for the predominant AE origin spot, this sliver of the Sudanese/Ethiopian coast is it.
(Though admittedly I am assuming that the biological affinity of a given Afrasan population to the original proto-Afrasan population would increase once you got closer to the linguistic origin point, and that this pattern of affinity would fade out once you moved further away from that point. But I am open to correction on that point.)
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
@Fourty2Tribes. Ask yourself this question. Do you think the physical measurements that were used to describe "Caucasoid" and or "Negroid" exist in human populations?
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes: Come on Swenet I got 4 racks on a Joseph Greenberg vs Jean Claude Mboli debate.
The Mboli crowed would do it for free. Where are my Greenbergers? Where is Team Osiris? I got 4 racks. 2 for both $ides.Lets get it in and stop bullsh1ting.
Mboli's work is not supported by comparative linguistic methods.
The Origine des langues africaines: essai d'application de la méthode, by Jean-Claude Mboli, is a new book that claims to provide an introduction to the Black African-Egyptian language. The Black African-Egyptian languages was discovered by Anta Diop and Th. Obenga who recognized that a genetic relationship existed between Black African (mainly Niger-Congo languages) and the ancient Egyptian language.
There is a new book on Proto-Black African Egyptian languages. Black African _egyptian or Negro-Egyptian is the name Afrocentric linguists have given to the the genetic linguistic relationship between languages spoken by Black Africans and the ancient Egyptian language. This new book is called: Origine des langues africaines: essai d'application de la méthode by Jean-Claude Mboli.
Diop's, Parente genetique de LEgyptien Pharaonique et des Langues Negro-Africaines, is the most exhuastive study of Negro-Egyptian, and no matter what you say it does prove Niger-Congo exist because it demonstrates connections between Egyptian and Niger-Congo languages.
I have not read Mboli’s entire book. But I have read summaries of his book
If you can read French the pages at Google books gives a good understanding of what Mboli is doing in his work/book. .
Diop's theory of linguistic constancy recognizes the social role language plays in African language change. Language being a variable phenomena has as much to do with a speaker's society as with the language itself. Thus social organization can influence the rate of change within languages. Meillet (1926, 17) wrote that:
“Since language is a social institution it follows that linguistics is a social science, and the only variable element to which one may appeal in order to account for a linguistic change is social change, of which language variations are but the consequences.”
The theory of linguistic continuity for African languages nullifies Mboli’s argument for stages in Negro-Egyptian. In the article above I show the changes that took place within English over a period of 900 years. There was marked differences between Ebglish 900 years ago and present day English. I also illustrated that Mandekan terms collected by the Medieval Arabs over 500 years ago have full agreement with modern Mandekan terms. Indicating the continuity between old and modern Mandekan. If you noticed carefully, I can support my claim of African linguistic continuity based on modern lexica and Mandekan material 500 plus years old. Mboli makes bold claims about the existence of periods when Negro-Egyptian was spoken but he has no text to support his claims for these periods accept Middle Egyptian, since he does not accept Coptic as an Egyptian language. This makes his theory invalidate and unreliable.
. .
Mboli is trying to make it appear that African proto-terms are identical to PIE.
It is sad to me that Mboli represents proto-Negro-Egyptian as almost identical to PIE, eventhough proto-African terms due to linguistic continuity have not changed that much in 4-5,000 years and therefore the description provide by Mboli does not reflect African linguistic reality.
Much of the work in recent years that have Europeans practicing a agro-patoral civilization that included mining in addition to farming is hogwash. Proto-Europeans were nomads, nothing more.
The new PIE terms relating to anything but a nomadic existence are going to be African in origin because Africans introduced and maintained civilization in Europe until after 1000BC when I-E people invaded Europe. Asar, like most African and Afro-American researchers you have been so brainwashed that you can't believe that Europe was only recently occupied by Europeans. But Europeans have always known tha civilization in Europe originated with Africans. Dr N. Lahovary, in Dravidian Origins and the West (only recently translated from French into English) provides numerous research on the Africans in Europe.
Because Mboli's work makes Proto-Negro-Egyptian and African proto-terms generally identical to PIE makes his work appear satisfactory since it recognizes the superiority of Eurocentric views of African languages and linguistics. Eurocentrics already believe that Egypt was founded by "whites" so Mboli's findings only confirms their theories, that a group of "whites" spread civilization across Africa. That's why they ignore his claims about Negro-Egyptian being the parent of PIE.
Secondly, you can not determine stages in a language simply by looking at morphemes.
The periods Mboli claims for Negro-Egyptian grammars are myth and never existed.
quote:
VI.14 Évolution grammaticale du négro-égyptien…………………… 361 VI.14.1 Grammaire du négro-égyptien archaïque ………………….. 362 VI.14.2 Grammaire du négro-égyptien pré-classique………………. 365 VI.14.3 Grammaire du négro-égyptien classique…………………… 367 VI.14.4 Grammaire du négro-égyptien post-classique........................ 370 Chapitre VII. Correspondances lexicologiques…………………… 373
After reading the book Mboli claims he arrived at the divisions of Negro-Egyptian grammar by looking at the morphologies of NE "base" words(See pp.361-362).
Google books gives numerous segments of the Mboli book:
This is impossible you can only determine periods in a language by looking at written text. Just looking at the base vocabulary can only allow you to find cognate terms. The only consecutive written text relate to the various stages in Egyptian.
You can accept what ever you wish.But you will remain ignorant of comparative linguistics until you acquire the knowledge base to determine what is junk and what is comparative linguistics.
Why do you say that Mboli only discusses PIE in the last chapter. Throughout his discussion of PNE terms under the title of Correspondances lexicologiques he compares the PNE words to PIE.
You hope to hide this reality, because most people on the forum don't read French. This can be remedied if the reader can copy the text and place it in Google translation program.
Mboli wants to make it appear that PNE was the originator of PIE, that is why he has attempted to make his PNE terms conform to PIE forms.
Eurocentrists know this. They are just waiting until African and Afro-American africologist use Mboli's text to support their work and then show how what Mboli has written, for the most part, is nonsense.
The good thing is that most Africologists never present their work to expertsat National and International Conferences where Graduate students and professors will hear their presentations, so they can pretend what ever is written by a popular Africologist is the "truth". I publish my work in journals with editors who have experts to peer review my work, and if it does not meet the standards of comparative and historical linguistics it will not be published.
The major problem is that linguists who are Afro-American Africalogist and French speaking African researchers have done considerable work detailing the morphology and lexical analogy of Egyptian to Wolof, Egyptian to Bantu and etc., but they have not reconstructed proto-terms for Bantu, Wolof and Negro-Egyptian so they don't know how to evaluate Mboli's work.
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes: This is what I mean with the albinos. Linguist have noticed the ties to Niger Congo, Sumarian and Indo-European languages yet the Greenberg school argues that Niger Congo is much younger than the bulk OoA migrations. If Niger Congo is old enough to have a stronger genetic relationship with Afro-Asiatic languages then how relevant are oide 'sciences' and phenotypes? What difference would anthropology make?
We're speaking a language that did not originate in Africa. It's impossible to reconstruct our population affinity by studying the language we speak. This is why we need genetics and physical anthropology. These two disciplines can supply the right information when linguistics puts us on a completely wrong course (linguistically we're English speakers).
If we only study linguistics, we cannot tell if we're on the right track when it comes to reconstructing an unknown population's history. And if ancient Egyptians spoke a Niger Congo language, in a way it would be just like us speaking English or Mbuti speaking Bantu or Nilo-Saharan. In all these cases we have people who speak a language that is incongruent with their ancestry. This incongruence cannot be solved with linguistics. Linguistics only tells us what language someone speaks and whether/how it relates to other languages.
This is why it's easy for linguists to drift off into theories that are completely detached from reality.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
None of this is a problem for me since I don't cling to Out of Africa dogma.
Printer-friendly view of this topic