...
EgyptSearch Forums Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» EgyptSearch Forums » Egyptology » What's the difference between genome-wide data and mitochondrial genomes? (Page 2)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 5 pages: 1  2  3  4  5   
Author Topic: What's the difference between genome-wide data and mitochondrial genomes?
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

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

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

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

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
the above chart is based upon STR analyis not autosomal SNPs. We know Mzabs carry a high frequency of "Eurasian" autosomal SNPs but clearly they are MORE African than West Africans/African Americans.

That is why autosomal SNPs is useless. The STR/CODIS clearly follows a geographical cline. What stands out is the Aframs falls smack in the middle of Berbers. Also what is striking is the furthest genetically are Mzabs and Northern Europeans/Euro-Americans.

The Abusir mummies are Africans

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

Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
[QB] the above chart is based upon STR analyis not autosomal SNPs. We know Mzabs carry a high frequency of "Eurasian" autosomal SNPs but clearly they are MORE African than West Africans/African Americans.


^nonsense


.


AFRICAN AMERICANS


 -
Charting the Ancestry of African Americans
Antonio Salas, 2005
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1275617/

.
_______________________________________________________


MOZABITES

 -
Introducing the Algerian Mitochondrial DNA and Y-Chromosome Profiles into the North African Landscape
Asmahan Bekada, 2013

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0056775


 -

Posts: 42966 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
As usual Lioness trying to confuse the unsuspecting and novice reader. Will someone explain to HIM that what he posted corroborates my point. He is comparing apples and oranges. Yes, West African/AFRAMs carry more mtDNA L than MZabs, but these are uniparental markers passed from mothers to offsprings and continued through the daughters, but autosomal STR confirms that geographically the MZabs are more African than West Africans/AFRAMS and are more distant to North Europeans. That means the MZab has existed in Africa longer than maybe modern West Africans. The length of branch indicates they have been isolated for a very long time. This also supports the view that their lineage is indigenous as supported by Kefi et al. Over 22,000years ago mtDNA H existed in Africa BEFORE entry as Neolithic Europeans (6000years ago).

There was never any back-migration and Europeans are a subset of Africans. Holistically SNPs are useless. Without the appropriate tool such as TReeMix.

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

Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
This also supports the view that their lineage is indigenous as supported by Kefi et al.
quote:


why are you lying? Over and over again Kefi calls these haplogroups Eurasian



the maternal genetic lineage of TAF population is composed of North African hap logroup (U6) and Eurasian haplogroups (H, U, R0).

Interestingly among the seven samples tested, no Sub-Saharan haplogroups (L0–L7) were identified.

Our results showed that the mtDNA sequences of the seven specimens from AFA are classified exclusively into Eurasiatic haplogroups: H or U (three individuals), T2 (two individuals), JT (one individual), and J (one individual). Our findings are in agreement with our previous study

Our phylogenetic analysis showed that Iberomaurusian individuals from TAF and AFA (coastal archaeological sites in Northern Morocco and in Northern Algeria respectively) are genetically close to Berbers from the North of Morocco, Berbers from the Jerba Island in Tunisia and close to some South Western European populations: Valencia and the Balearic Islands from Spain and Sardinia from Italy

According to our results, the presence of Eurasian haplogroups (JT, J, T, H, R0a1, U) in AFA and in TAF individu- als suggests that these lineages were present in North Africa at least 21,000 YBP confirming the estimated coales- cence time for these haplogroups (Brandst€atter et al. 2008;)

-- On the origin of Iberomaurusians: new data based on ancient mitochondrial DNA and phylogenetic analysis of Afalou and Taforalt populations
Rym Kefi 2017


.


.

quote:

https://bmcgenet.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12863-017-0514-6

Phylogeographic and phylogenetic analyses performed in the present study suggest that the main H sub-Hg indicators of post-glacial population expansions from the Iberian refuge were H1 and H3, the most frequent maternal lineages in Iberia. The time depths calculated for these sub-clades in Iberia and the Maghreb, together with the presence of specific H variants in some North African populations –revealed at a deep phylogenetic resolution (e.g. H1v1, H1w, and others in Tuareg from Libya [16])– it would support scenarios of ancient radiations in the direction Iberia-to-North Africa. Accordingly, the genetic structure analysis of Mediterranean populations by AMOVA demonstrated that Italy was significantly different from Iberia (see Table 4) and that this dissimilarity was not as visible between Iberian and Maghrebian populations. These findings suggest that gene flow between Europe and northwestern Africa, involving Hg H, would have occurred primarily through Iberia. The HCA also provided strong support for this assertion.

--The distribution of mitochondrial DNA haplogroup H in southern Iberia indicates ancient human genetic exchanges along the western edge of the Mediterranean, 2017


 -
Introducing the Algerian Mitochondrial DNA and Y-Chromosome Profiles into the North African Landscape
Asmahan Bekada, 2013


^^ As we can see haplogroup L is under 3% in Mozabites.

Therefore even if one argued for an African origin of Haplogroup H Europeans maternally are closer to Mozabites and many of the other berbers than Sub Saharan Africans are maternally to these H carrying berbers
If you want to go that route it would be more useful to suggest that berbers are the maternal ancestors of Europeans instead of saying European are depigmented Africans which has nice shock value but is a lot more vague.
Anyway this Bekada chart shows Mozabites 22.35% H carriers and 27% U6
Ancient DNA classified as belonging to the U* mitochondrial haplogroup has been recovered from human remains found in Western Siberia, dated to c. 45,000 years ago
( "Carriers of human mitochondrial DNA macrohaplogroup M colonized India from southeastern Asia" -Cabrera 2017)

Also notable are Libyan Tuaregs carry haplogroup H at 61% ( Ottoni 2010)

The Y haplogroup M81 is an E clade and that is the most common West African E , although a different sub clade of it
So you have to ask yourself why maternally are berbers mainly H and U6 carriers which are entirely different clades than Sub Saharans, virtually no H recorded in other non-Northern parts of Africa

Posts: 42966 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ase
Member
Member # 19740

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ase     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
 -

Wouldn't that pretty long line on the African American branch suggest they're fairly distant to these groups? The length of that line looks about as long as the distance between NC Berbers and Andalusians?
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Thereal
Member
Member # 22452

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Thereal     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
If I'm interpreting xyman right,the comparison is not between Africans but other people to African groups.
Posts: 1123 | From: New York | Registered: Feb 2016  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
No! read the link.


quote:
Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
 -

Wouldn't that pretty long line on the African American branch suggest they're fairly distant to these groups? The length of that line looks about as long as the distance between NC Berbers and Andalusians?
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
[qb] Swenet .....or Sage may remember the chart I posted when I schooled him on dendogram branch lengths and showed Berbers are Negros. I will try to find it on one of my many computers I post from.

Sometimes when you can't find the name of a paper, you can just google your old posts. If you can remember how you phrased your comments and the keywords you used, it's a good way to find old papers. Here is your paper:

quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
Get to work guys...

http://i46.tinypic.com/28gtcvq.jpg


Genetic structure of north-west Africa revealed by STR analysis

http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=008329;p=1#000011 [/Q]


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

Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
 -
Genetic structure of north-west Africa revealed by STR analysis, 2000
http://www.bioinfo-cbs.org/avd/en/pmid/str/10854096.pdf


quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:

the above chart is based upon STR analyis not autosomal SNPs. We know Mzabs carry a high frequency of "Eurasian" autosomal SNPs but clearly they are MORE African than West Africans/African Americans.


We know Mzabs carry a high frequency of "Eurasian" autosomal SNPs but clearly they are MORE African than West Africans/African Americans.


The above is an unrooted branch tree. Therefore your claim that the Mozabite sare "MORE African than West Africans/African Americans" is unfounded silliness
You have been posting this chart for years and you have been misunderstanding since 2012. Up and down positions on this type of unrooted chart are meaningless. There is no trunk or root. You can rotate this chart any way and it has no effect. It just shows the interrelatedness of each group. Up on this chart is not more European, down is not more African. It has no directional orientation.
The useless orange line you drew through the chart is another illustration of how you don't understand the difference between a rooted and an unrooted tree chart

Posts: 42966 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ase
Member
Member # 19740

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ase     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
No! read the link.


I'm still confused as to why the AFRAM branch is so long, even though you're saying the number 16 means it's distance is shorter.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I know, I know, Lioness does that deliberately. He is here to confuse and misdirect. Muddy the water.

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

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

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Lioness does not read what he himself post. The Chart said "GENETIC DISTANCE!!!" and it is based upon STRs. Nevertheless, Keep in mind the paper focuses ONLY on NW Africa and Western Europe. Khoisan, Twa , East Africans and Eastern Europeans and Near East is NOT included.

There are several populations in that chart that have long branches. Basque, MZab and AFRAMS(West Africans). If you read the link you will understand the "numerals' represent distance while the length of the branch represent uniqueness or length of isolation. Example if Khoi-San were included then their branch length may be off the charts and all other branches will seem insignificant. Understand that! MZab, West Africans and Basque are about the same length with AFRAMS being a tard longer. If Twa were included and placed next to AFRAMS I expect AFRAM branch to be extremely short to almost insignificance. There was indeed an older population in West Africa but it is NOT modern day West Africans.

On "16", This is what I was alluding to. The "16" does NOT represent branch length. It represents distances BETWEEN the branches. READ THE THERAD AGAIN!! And the paper.

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

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

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What is interesting also is that Catalans and Euro-Americans are at the same root but Andalusians and Basque root differently. So within Iberia there are FOUR Separate populations and within Spain there are THREE. In Spain there are the Basque, Catalans and Andalusian. The Catalans are More "European".

Notice also the Iberians are closer to NW Africans vs other Europeans which matches geography Of course there is a barrier looking at the value of "77". But there is also a barrier between Basque and Italians at 72 and Basques and Portuguese at 59.

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

Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
 -

Wouldn't that pretty long line on the African American branch suggest they're fairly distant to these groups? The length of that line looks about as long as the distance between NC Berbers and Andalusians?
^^^ See this Oshun comment? This is before I debunked xyyman nonsense where he claims Mozabite berbers are "more African" than West Africans based on this char which he added the orange line to "doctored"


Then Oshun said this

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
No! read the link.


I'm still confused as to why the AFRAM branch is so long, even though you're saying the number 16 means it's distance is shorter.
And below xyyman ,right after pretends that Oshun was replying to my comment

quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
I know, I know, Lioness does that deliberately. He is here to confuse and misdirect. Muddy the water.

But Oshun was not replying to me comment. He was asking the same thing he asked xyyman before

Oshun, when are you going to realize xyymans comments are laden with error and misinterpretation. If you ask him about one thing he answers and raises two new things that are wrong. It's endless. xyyman hasn't known how to read these charts since 2012

The answer to Oshun's question is in the proper version of the chart where the numbers are explained in the text of figure 1


 -

Posts: 42966 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
huh?!! Lioness, read the thread Swenet pulled up.

BTW - for everyone's information. We are talking STRs here. Don't Lioness mi-direct the discussion.

Oshun confusion stems from discrepancy between Uniparental markers vs autosomal SNPs. Beyoku touched on the answer somewhat. I am stating that frequency SNP is useless when compared to well established STR's analysis which is still used by criminalist. People who are not caught up in racism when it comes to catching criminals..

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

Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
 -


quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
[QB] huh?!! Lioness, read the thread Swenet pulled up.


Ok

http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=008329;p=1#000011

quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
The distance between ALL AFRICANS and EUROPEANS is 77.

^ That is wrong, shall we continue going over each wrong statement in that other thread also? That chart does not represent all Africans and it is the percentage that a certain branch is found in 10000 bootstrapped trees, that is not distance and why the numbers don't correspond with the line lengths
Furthermore you use this chart to refer to such distance and at the same time on of your themes is to try to say Europeans are depigmented Africans !

Posts: 42966 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Elmaestro
Moderator
Member # 22566

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Elmaestro     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"That chart does not represent all Africans and it is the percentage that a certain branch is found in 10000 bootstrapped trees"

^mind elaborating on what this means lioness?

Or even Xyyman, you wanna take a go at it?

In laymans language...

Posts: 1782 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote: "From the Study:
"The two STRONGEST genetic boundaries in the geographical area comprised by NW Africa and the Iberian Peninsula (see Figure 3) were found to encircle single populations.

STR diversity AMONG populations
Genetic differentiation among the populations of both the extended and basic sets was analysed by computing Fst genetic distances and representing them by means of neighbour- joining trees (Figures 1a and 1b). We also computed other genetic distances (data not shown):
the NW African populations cluster together, although with short and not very statistically robust branches among them. In the basic analysis, the Mozabites stand out from the rest of the NW Africans


It should be noted that the MOST robust branch (77%) in the tree is that separating NW Africans(AND AFRAMS) from Europeans. Among
the Iberians, Andalusians and Portuguese are closest to NW Africa.

African-Americans appear linked to NW Africa through a long branch."

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

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

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
AFRAMs and Berbers are AFRICANS based upon STR. Of "Europeans" the closest match is ANDALUSIANS and Portuguese. Why? Geography!!!! It is a continuum!!!!!!! Europeans are a subset of Africans.

Do you know WHY Italians are higher up the Tree? ANswer: They are compared to the wrong set of Africans. If Amazigh from central Sahara or East Africa were included Island Italians would be closer than Iberians. THere is no race. Europeans are a subset of Africans

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

Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Elmaestro:
"That chart does not represent all Africans and it is the percentage that a certain branch is found in 10000 bootstrapped trees"

^mind elaborating on what this means lioness?

Or even Xyyman, you wanna take a go at it?

In laymans language...

http://gogarten.uconn.edu/mcb221_2006/class30.html

Bootstrapping is one of the most popular ways to assess the reliability of branches. The term bootstrapping goes back to the Baron Münchhausen (pulled himself out of a swamp by his shoe laces). Briefly, positions of the aligned sequences are randomly sampled from the multiple sequence alignment with replacements.? The sampled positions are assembled into new data sets, the so-called bootstrapped samples. Each position has an about 63% chance to make it into a particular bootstrapped sample. If a grouping has a lot of support, it will be supported by at least some positions in each of the bootstrapped samples, and all the bootstrapped samples will yield this grouping. Bootstrapping can be applied to all methods of phylogenetic reconstruction.
Bootstrapping thus realizes the impossible: the evolution of sequences in real life happened only once, and it is impossible to run the evolution of, let's say, small subunit ribosomal RNAs again. Nevertheless, using the resampling approach, pseudosamples are generated that have a variation that resembles the variation one would have obtained, if it were possible to sample 100 or 1000 parallel worlds in which the evolution of 16S rRNAs occurred over and over again. You end up with a statistical analyses using a single original sample only.

Bootstrapping has become very popular to assess the reliability of reconstructed phylogenies. Its advantage is that it can be applied to different methods of phylogenetic reconstruction, and that it assigns a probability-like number to every possible partition of the dataset (= branch in the resulting tree). Its disadvantage is that the support for individual groups decreases as you add more sequences to the dataset, and that it just measures how much support for a partition is in your data given a method of analysis. If the method of reconstruction falls victim to a bias or an artifact, this will be reproduced for every of the bootstrapped samples, and it will result in high bootstrap support values. Some researchers such as a person known as xyyman on the Egyptology forum, Egyptsearch have no straps on their boots. This leads to the boots falling off and has been an ongoing problem in such approaches


quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:

The distance between ALL AFRICANS and EUROPEANS is 77.

^ In other words, wrong in two different was

---------------------------------------------------

correcting xyyman is a full time job

Posts: 42966 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Elmaestro
Moderator
Member # 22566

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Elmaestro     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
you only need like 6-9 sentences. Want to try again in your own lay friendly words? Can you explain why Xyymans lack of understanding of the what the figures represent in the neighbor joining tree makes his argument fundamentally wrong..?

Going back to the previous page, @Xyyman, is it necessary to dismiss one approach when using another? Those haplogroups found in abusir el meleq couldn't have possibly came from inner Africa, it's impossible... Sometimes it feel like you forget that their are haplogroups upstream, that till this day haven't been found on the continent. The STR argument kinda irrelevant as it doesn't directly contradict anything recently discussed. Matterfact, see Tukuler North African thread.

Posts: 1782 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Some researchers such as a person known as xyyman on the Egyptology forum, Egyptsearch have no straps on their boots. This leads to the boots falling off and has been an ongoing problem in such approaches"

ever the comedian.

oh! I am waiting to be corrected. ANYONE!!!??

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

Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
AFRAMs and Berbers are AFRICANS based upon STR.

STRs are for determining male haplogroups
AFRAM and berbers are both most commonly E carriers.
However the most common sub clade in berbers E-M81 is not common in AFRAMS

And if you instead look at the mtDNA AFRAMs and berbers are not similar in a much bigger way unless they have mixed parents

Posts: 42966 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
WTF are you talking about Lioneze? STR are for determining male haplogroups(only)!?

WT.....

Remind me! Why am I having this discussion with you again?

quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
AFRAMs and Berbers are AFRICANS based upon STR.

STRs are for determining male haplogroups
AFRAM and berbers are both most commonly E carriers.
However the most common sub clade in berbers E-M81 is not common in AFRAMS

And if you instead look at the mtDNA AFRAMs and berbers are not similar in a much bigger way unless they have mixed parents



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

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

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I will pretend that you did NOT understand I am speaking about autosomal STRs.

Continuing.....Agreed AFRAMS carry mostly E-M2* while Berbers carry E-M35-81. But we are speaking AUTOSOMES Mr Lioneze. lol!

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

Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
 -

quote:
Originally posted by Elmaestro:
you only need like 6-9 sentences. Want to try again in your own lay friendly words? Can you explain why Xyymans lack of understanding of the what the figures represent in the neighbor joining tree makes his argument fundamentally wrong..?


quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
The distance between ALL AFRICANS and EUROPEANS is 77.


the distance between all Africans and Europeans is not 77

It is a confidence estimate on a particular branch.

If you want to known the distances on the tee look at the length of the lines

And disregard people trying to spin the numbers in as completely wrong way to try to suggest the distances of the lines are other than shown.

Secondly there are two main types of phylogenetic tree.
Rooted starts at the bottom and branches out
Unrooted just shows the distance relation between each branch, there is no starting point

Posts: 42966 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I am not sure what you are on about. I always contend AEians including Abusir are indigenous Africans. And has absolutely nothing to do with "Eurasian" except some SHARED ancestry. I am not sure what you mean by INNER Africa. If you think I am saying AEians are Nigerians. You misunderstand what I am saying. AEians are closest connected to peoples of the Great Lakes as shown by prior autosomal STR data in the Amarnas. No STR data was provided of the Abusir muumies but the haplogroup profile is consistent with the Great Lakes.....AGAIN.

Do AEians share genetic links to West Africans ...YES! But not more than East Africans of the Great Lakes who are sub-saharans.

Why is this so difficult to understand?


quote:
Originally posted by Elmaestro:
you only need like 6-9 sentences. Want to try again in your own lay friendly words? Can you explain why Xyymans lack of understanding of the what the figures represent in the neighbor joining tree makes his argument fundamentally wrong..?

Going back to the previous page, @Xyyman, is it necessary to dismiss one approach when using another? Those haplogroups found in abusir el meleq couldn't have possibly came from inner Africa, it's impossible... Sometimes it feel like you forget that their are haplogroups upstream, that till this day haven't been found on the continent. The STR argument kinda irrelevant as it doesn't directly contradict anything recently discussed. Matterfact, see Tukuler North African thread.



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

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

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The only problem with the Abusir dataset is the unexpected low number of mtDNA L. But they are Africans. Keeping in mind mtDNA L existed in "Eurasian" Neolithic Samples at higher frequency as some studies have shown. That makes me think the researchers doctored the results of Abusir.

But Abusir dataset matches Great Lake Africans. Any one who knows their geography will know it is impossible for mtDNA not to exist in Egypt if it is found in Iberia and the Levant during the Neolithic.

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

Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
xyyman is saying mtDNA doesn't count, Barack Obama is 100% African
Posts: 42966 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
No Lioneze. I am saying you need to take ALL the data into consideration. Least of which is statistical manipulation using FREQUENCY of SNPs. Autosomal STRs combined with uniparental haplogroups or haplotypes takes precedence.

quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
xyyman is saying mtDNA doesn't count, Barack Obama is 100% African



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

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

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Back in the day" their game was statistical manipulation of FREQUENCY of uniparental markers. same game, different dataset

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

Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Elmaestro
Moderator
Member # 22566

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Elmaestro     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Bringing up west Africans in regards to abusir is lazy... I didn't say anything about them, I could be talking about Great Lakes South Sudan, Ethiopia, Chad, Libya and southern Egypt. I mean abusir is one of the closest points to Asia... Inner Africa could mean from just about anywhere in respects to that location.

Your looking at the fact that these down stream clades are found sporadically in ssa and calling them indigenous. But in every area where any of the diverse ASIAN haplogroups are found there are MOSTLY indigenous L lineages and their upstream clades are Absent. Are you telling me that the chosen ones from every ethnic group that didn't carry L lineages joined forces and migrated to Egypt???? Are you retarded?

I mean Jeeze, did you not see khans comments on the upcoming Tanzania pastoralist study.

"Expansion from NE Africa to everywhere"

It's time to start putting two and two together and wake up from your eurofantasy dream. Those Asian lineages entered Africa through Egypt bruh.

Posts: 1782 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
As usual Lioness trying to confuse the unsuspecting and novice reader. Will someone explain to HIM that what he posted corroborates my point. He is comparing apples and oranges. Yes, West African/AFRAMs carry more mtDNA L than MZabs, but these are uniparental markers passed from mothers to offsprings and continued through the daughters, but autosomal STR confirms that geographically the MZabs are more African than West Africans/AFRAMS and are more distant to North Europeans. That means the MZab has existed in Africa longer than maybe modern West Africans. The length of branch indicates they have been isolated for a very long time. This also supports the view that their lineage is indigenous as supported by Kefi et al. Over 22,000years ago mtDNA H existed in Africa BEFORE entry as Neolithic Europeans (6000years ago).

There was never any back-migration and Europeans are a subset of Africans.
Holistically SNPs are useless. Without the appropriate tool such as TReeMix.

Yep!


quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
"Back in the day" their game was statistical manipulation of FREQUENCY of uniparental markers. same game, different dataset

True!
Posts: 22245 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
BS on all 3 counts. You are blowing smoke.

I posted these Abusir HG are found as far as Tanzania and they are UPSTREAM clades ...WTF.

Why couldn't they Abusir HG come from Great Lake Again? What is your argument? They are still found in Great Lakes region. R0 and M1 is still found in Africa. M1 is found from theShores of the Red Sea to Islands off Nigeria ...WT....


The STR argument IS relevant. Because it shows GEOGRAPHICAL affinity unlike SNP which is really SHARED ancestry.

What are you smoking bruh??!! You got some bad weed.!

quote:
Originally posted by Elmaestro:
[Q]
Going back to the previous page, @Xyyman, is it necessary to dismiss one approach when using another?

- Those haplogroups found in abusir el meleq couldn't have possibly came from inner Africa, it's impossible...

-Sometimes it feel like you forget that their are **haplogroups upstream***, that till this day haven't been found on the continent.

**The STR argument kinda irrelevant** as it doesn't directly contradict anything recently discussed.

Matterfact, see Tukuler North African thread. [/QB]



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

Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Djehuti
Member
Member # 6698

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Djehuti     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun:
 -

Is one more comprehensive than the other? Because the way this illustration looks, mtdna could reflect as little as 1/16th of your overall ancestry...

By the way, the chart above looks misleading in that it shows the male to inherit 1/2 of his Y chromosome from his father and 1/2 of his mitochondria from his mother. Of course this is not what happens. Instead a male inherits the ENTIRE Y chromosome intact from his father and ALL of his mother's mitochondria. It just so happens that a male can only pass on his Y chromosome to progeny via his sperm but not mitochondria which is carried by the female's egg.
Posts: 26322 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Elmaestro
Moderator
Member # 22566

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Elmaestro     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
BS on all 3 counts. You are blowing smoke.

I posted these Abusir HG are found as far as Tanzania and they are UPSTREAM clades ...WTF.

Why couldn't they Abusir HG come from Great Lake Again? What is your argument? They are still found in Great Lakes region. R0 and M1 is still found in Africa. M1 is found from theShores of the Red Sea to Islands off Nigeria ...WT....


The STR argument IS relevant. Because it shows GEOGRAPHICAL affinity unlike SNP which is really SHARED ancestry.

What are you smoking bruh??!! You got some bad weed.!

quote:
Originally posted by Elmaestro:
[Q]
Going back to the previous page, @Xyyman, is it necessary to dismiss one approach when using another?

- Those haplogroups found in abusir el meleq couldn't have possibly came from inner Africa, it's impossible...

-Sometimes it feel like you forget that their are **haplogroups upstream***, that till this day haven't been found on the continent.

**The STR argument kinda irrelevant** as it doesn't directly contradict anything recently discussed.

Matterfact, see Tukuler North African thread.

[/QB]
"Your looking at the fact that these down stream clades are found sporadically in ssa and calling them indigenous. But in every area where any of the diverse ASIAN haplogroups are found there are MOSTLY indigenous L lineages and their upstream clades are Absent. Are you telling me that the chosen ones from every ethnic group that didn't carry L lineages joined forces and migrated to Egypt????"

If you beleive M1 is idigenous fine, whatever.... If you beleive R0 is native to Uganda and tanzania somehow.... Fine too, I'll give you "points." But my main point remains, how are you planning on explaining this.?? can you even name any SSA region with any of these H.groups present in combination with a low frequency of L.

please enlighten, do you believe that Africans banded together and formed the "non-L coalition" before migrating north? lol

Matterfact what exactly do you expect to see if we looked at FST and NJT's of the Abusir mummy microsatellites? what pattern will you expect, that'll dispell, corroborate or Straighten out any thing that has been said for the past few months?

@Djehuti
Ovals are women, squares are men. the teminal has an example of a male and female offspring... Blue reps the pipeline for Ydna, Grey for MtDNA. Oshuns example is not wrong at all.

Posts: 1782 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
stop hurting xyyman [Wink]
Posts: 42966 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
1. Those haplogroups WILL be found Sporadically in Africa because of the high diversity of Africans. Africans carry the ancestral or upstream of these haplogropus ...whenever they are discovered. Whenever they are discovered Africans carry the ancestral forms. Like in the Abusir mummies. These Euro-Researchers are starting to str8up outright lie now!!!!! Before they would statistically manipulate the data but now they are outright falsifying the data. It is impossible for mtDNA L to exist in the early Neolithic Levant and even extant Levantines and be at such low frequency in the Abusir mommies. MtDNA L is also found in pre-historic Iberia. Don't forget that. THEY ARE LYING!!!! Added the ones they do disclose are closer to Great Lakes Africans.
2. Yes, mtDNA M1 is indigenous!!!!!, Kivilsid et al and a few others. The most diverse form of M1 is found IN Africa. R0 is has highest diversity on BOTH sides of the Red Sea. Sudan and SOUTH Arabian Peninisular-YEMEN (ie the blackest people on the land mast). M1 is found in Nigeria to the Horn and including North Africa. M1 in Europe is downstream!!!! Of Africans'.
3. There is no banding together because these are Africans and the mtDNA L is NOT the ONLY African lineage. Regardless, the researchers are definitely LYING. There CANNOT be such a low frequency of L in Africa even in the Abusir mummies. I am confident of that. Prior data do NOT support that.
4. They cannot use SNP to assign affinity. Autosomal STRs determine geographic affliliations. That is why Berbers are classified as NEGROS in CODIS(FBI)
5. "What do I expect?", The Abusir mummies STR will show they are on the African side of the Tree. Just as when DNATribes opened our eyes to The Amarna STR values. The Abusir mummies STR will not be disclosed!! SNPs are meaningless that is why they play the statistical manipulation games. TreemIx with migration edges will also help.


As I said. Lay off the grass!

quote:
Originally posted by Elmaestro:
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
BS on all 3 counts. You are blowing smoke.

I posted these Abusir HG are found as far as Tanzania and they are UPSTREAM clades ...WTF.

Why couldn't they Abusir HG come from Great Lake Again? What is your argument? They are still found in Great Lakes region. R0 and M1 is still found in Africa. M1 is found from theShores of the Red Sea to Islands off Nigeria ...WT....


The STR argument IS relevant. Because it shows GEOGRAPHICAL affinity unlike SNP which is really SHARED ancestry.

What are you smoking bruh??!! You got some bad weed.!

quote:
Originally posted by Elmaestro:
[Q]
Going back to the previous page, @Xyyman, is it necessary to dismiss one approach when using another?

- Those haplogroups found in abusir el meleq couldn't have possibly came from inner Africa, it's impossible...

-Sometimes it feel like you forget that their are **haplogroups upstream***, that till this day haven't been found on the continent.

**The STR argument kinda irrelevant** as it doesn't directly contradict anything recently discussed.

Matterfact, see Tukuler North African thread.


"Your looking at the fact that these down stream clades are found sporadically in ssa and calling them indigenous. But in every area where any of the diverse ASIAN haplogroups are found there are MOSTLY indigenous L lineages and their upstream clades are Absent. Are you telling me that the chosen ones from every ethnic group that didn't carry L lineages joined forces and migrated to Egypt????"

If you beleive M1 is idigenous fine, whatever.... If you beleive R0 is native to Uganda and tanzania somehow.... Fine too, I'll give you "points." But my main point remains, how are you planning on explaining this.?? can you even name any SSA region with any of these H.groups present in combination with a low frequency of L.

please enlighten, do you believe that Africans banded together and formed the "non-L coalition" before migrating north? lol

Matterfact what exactly do you expect to see if we looked at FST and NJT's of the Abusir mummy microsatellites? what pattern will you expect, that'll dispell, corroborate or Straighten out any thing that has been said for the past few months?

@Djehuti
Ovals are women, squares are men. the teminal has an example of a male and female offspring... Blue reps the pipeline for Ydna, Grey for MtDNA. Oshuns example is not wrong at all. [/QB]



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

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

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
1. Those haplogroups WILL be found Sporadically in Africa because of the high diversity of Africans. Africans carry the ancestral or upstream of these haplogropus ...when they are discovered. Whenever they are discovered Africans carry the ancestral forms. Like in the Abusir mummies. These Euro-Researchers are starting to str8up outright lie now!!!!! Before they would statistically manipulate the data but now they are outright falsifying the data. It is impossible for mtDNA L to exist in the early Neolithic Levant and even extant Levantines and be at such low frequency in the Abusir mommies. MtDNA L is also found in pre-historic Iberia. Don't forget that. THEY ARE LYING!!!! Added the ones they do disclose are closer to Great Lakes Africans.
2. Yes, mtDNA M1 is indigenous!!!!!, Kivilsid et al and a few others. The most diverse form of M1 is found IN Africa. R0 is has highest diversity on BOTH sides of the Red Sea. Sudan and SOUTH Arabian Peninisular-YEMEN (ie the blackest people on the land mast). M1 is found in Nigeria to the Horn and including North Africa. M1 in Europe is downstream!!!! Of Africans'.
3. There is no banding together because these are Africans and the mtDNA L is NOT the ONLY African lineage. Regardless, the researchers are definitely LYING. There CANNOT be such a low frequency of L in Africa even in the Abusir mummies. I am confident of that. Prior data do NOT support that.
4. They cannot use SNP to assign affinity. Autosomal STRs determine geographic affliliations. That is why Berbers are classified as NEGROS in CODIS(FBI)
5. What do I expect, The Abusir mummies STR will show they are on the African side of the Tree. Just as when DNATribes opened our eyes to The Amarna STR values. The Abusir mummies STR will not be disclosed!! SNPs are meaningless that is why the play the statistical manipulation games. TreemIx with migration edges will also help.


Including peoples from the Great lakes will also help(After all this where they AEians said they were from ...right?!) lol! Only a fool will get caught in their manipulation deceptions. Typical Europeans and their games of cheating and lying. The logical thing to do is compare apples and apples. Included the right populations first, and then use and disclose and compare global groups. This is not about science but the continued stealing of African history. And Europeans trying to include themselves into the past greatness. They need to get over it!

ALL genetic evidence shows there is a continuum will AFRICA as the focal point. This only changed with in the last 500-600years.

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

Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:

4. They cannot use SNP to assign affinity. Autosomal STRs determine geographic affliliations. That is why Berbers are classified as NEGROS in CODIS(FBI)

on the same basis Europeans are light skinned Negroes
Posts: 42966 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
As more Africans are analyzed here is what the Europeans are saying ...Eupedia.com

Quote:
" Nowadays small percentages (1 to 4%) of R1b-V88 are found in the Levant, among the Lebanese, the Druze, and the Jews, and almost in every country in Africa north of the equator. Higher frequency in Egypt (5%), among Berbers from the Egypt-Libya border (23%), among the Sudanese Copts (15%), the Hausa people of Sudan (40%), the Fulani people of the Sahel (54% in Niger and Cameroon), and Chadic tribes of northern Nigeria and northern Cameroon (especially among the Kirdi), where it is observed at a frequency ranging from 30% to 95% of men. ..... ... However, R1b-V88 is not only present among Chadic speakers, but also among Senegambian speakers (Fula-Hausa) and Semitic speakers (Berbers, Arabs). R1b-V88 is found among the native populations!!!!!! of Rwanda, South Africa, Namibia, Angola, Congo, Gabon, Equatorial Guinea, Ivory Coast, Guinea-Bissau."

You do know that R-V88 is upstream of R1b-M269?


The Abusir mummies are Africans

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

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

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
 -
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:

4. They cannot use SNP to assign affinity. Autosomal STRs determine geographic affliliations. That is why Berbers are classified as NEGROS in CODIS(FBI)

on the same basis Europeans are light skinned Negroes


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

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

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Someone should tell these misguided, lying and delusional Europeans that South Africa, Namibia, Angola and parts of Rwanda and Congo are SOUTH of the equator. R1b-V88 is indigenous to Africa just as most of the mtDNA found in the Abusir mummies albeit at low frequency. Just as R1b-V88 is an upstream clade so too are the mtDNA clades found in the Abusir mummies.

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

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

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
example:
"In Africa, haplogroup T is primarily found among Afro-Asiatic-speaking populations, including the basal T* clade.[1] Some non-basal T clades are also commonly found among the Niger-Congo-speaking Serer

Read more: http://egyptsearchreloaded.proboards.com/thread/2493/abusir-ptolemy-ancient-egyptians-less#ixzz4oc79eGgD"

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

Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Elmaestro
Moderator
Member # 22566

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Elmaestro     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
@XYYman
[Roll Eyes]
I mean sure I guess you can just fall back on the "euros are lying," etc. whatever... But as opposed to spreading alternative facts, I elect to fuck em up with their own publications. I mean, they made the "mistake" of uploading these genomes Raw. STR, SNPs... Whatever, they are who they are, FFS they cluster relatively poorly with even NORTH AFRICANS, for people who are supposedly "indigenous". I know we don't like Occams razor around here but, my god, I haven't seen so many clear signals towards an explanation in my life.

Look I wanna show you something, but you gotta get off this "every Haplogroup is indigenous" train... It's harmful.

What you are saying as arguments in terms of the presence of these genes in SSA would makes sense in the grand scheme of things. I mean M can very well have it's inception on the continent.. R0, eh?? Maybe Djibouti?? either way, you're picking Dhalsim .. and don't get me started on the others...

So, I'ma remind you that they uploaded the full genomes raw lol... lets say if someone called the Abusir mummy STR's and measured the Fst, and they don't show your desired result what then? will you then shut up about these HG's being indigenous?

Posts: 1782 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Yes, I will like to see the STRs of the Abusir mummies with comparison of together with the relevant populations. Not some obscure population in the azz end of Africa like ....Senegal. Give me STRs of Great Lakes, Egypt, Levant with Bedoiuns and Yemen. And of course the "lying" cheating Europeans. I want the repeats of the autosomal STRs. So anyone can run their own analysis like with JAMA and the Amarna's

The 8 published for the Amarnas will be MOST helpful. And that will settle it. Maybe you know something I don't. lol!

Give up the grass bruh!! It will never happen. They won't make the same mistake ...TWICE

Put up or shut up!


quote:
Originally posted by Elmaestro:
@XYYman
:rolleyes:
I mean sure I guess you can just fall back on the "euros are lying," etc. whatever... But as opposed to spreading alternative facts, I elect to fuck em up with their own publications. I mean, they made the "mistake" of uploading these genomes Raw. STR, SNPs... Whatever, they are who they are, FFS they cluster relatively poorly with even NORTH AFRICANS, for people who are supposedly "indigenous". I know we don't like Occams razor around here but, my god, I haven't seen so many clear signals towards an explanation in my life.

Look I wanna show you something, but you gotta get off this "every Haplogroup is indigenous" train... It's harmful.

What you are saying as arguments in terms of the presence of these genes in SSA would makes sense in the grand scheme of things. I mean M can very well have it's inception on the continent.. R0, eh?? Maybe Djibouti?? either way, you're picking Dhalsim .. and don't get me started on the others...

So, I'ma remind you that they uploaded the full genomes raw lol... lets say if someone called the Abusir mummy STR's and measured the Fst, and they don't show your desired result what then? will you then shut up about these HG's being indigenous?



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

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

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN!! Because they know if the Amarna's are "Negros" the Abusir mummies are also "Negros". It is IMPOSSIBLE for the Abusir to be anything but "Negros" if the Armarnas are "Negros". Hawass cannot retest the Amarans..lol! It took almost a year before DNATribes exposed the truth. Remember even King Tut was R1b. lol!

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

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

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Here is what Keita states:

Quote"

"Taken together, the autosomal, Y chromosome ,and
Mitochondrial DNA data support the conclusion that the
Indigenous African components of the specific samples of
Modern Egyptians and modern Ethiopians studied by Pagani
etal. (2015) are uninformative with respect to the origin of
non-Africans.
The available data suggest that the separation
of ancient Egyptians and ancient Ethiopians *****postdates**** Out-of-
Africa.
In the absence of ancient DNA specimens, estimation of
Genetic profiles of core Afroasiatic and Nilo-Saharan speakers
Requires phylogenetic techniques to reconstruct ancestral
states."


You are blowing smoke

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

Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Forty2Tribes
Member
Member # 21799

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Forty2Tribes   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN!! Because they know if the Amarna's are "Negros" the Abusir mummies are also "Negros". It is IMPOSSIBLE for the Abusir to be anything but "Negros" if the Armarnas are "Negros". Hawass cannot retest the Amarans..lol! It took almost a year before DNATribes exposed the truth. Remember even King Tut was R1b. lol!

[Confused]
If the Abusir 3 werent melinated (negro) we would have their entire pigment profile. But what does that have to do with the Armanas? Why is it impossible for them to be different genetically?

Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
They cannot be genetically different because they are ...what...300 miles apart? Valley of the Kings vs Abusir

 -

If the Amarnas are "Negros" the Abusir mummies are Negro also.

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

Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 5 pages: 1  2  3  4  5   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | EgyptSearch!

(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com

Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3