...
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 » New Homo sapiens fossil found outside of Africa, from 194 kya (Page 1)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
Author Topic: New Homo sapiens fossil found outside of Africa, from 194 kya
BrandonP
Member
Member # 3735

Icon 1 posted      Profile for BrandonP   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Human History Gets Longer: Oldest Fossils Outside of Africa Found
quote:
The oldest fossils of modern humans outside Africa have been discovered in Israel, a new study finds.

The newly revealed jaw and teeth are estimated to be up to 194,000 years old. This makes these fossils at least 50,000 years older than modern human fossils previously unearthed outside Africa, and closer in age to when recent genetic results suggested modern humans may have first left Africa.

These new findings suggest that modern humans may have had more time to interact and interbreed with archaic human lineages outside of Africa than previously thought. The discovery also sheds light on the routes modern humans might have taken while dispersing from Africa.

So would this have any impact on time estimates for the migration of living non-Africans' ancestors outside the Mother Continent? Or do you think this could be a "dead-end" lineage that did not have anything to do with extant non-African populations?

--------------------
Brought to you by Brandon S. Pilcher

My art thread on ES

And my books thread

Posts: 7082 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
BrandonP
Member
Member # 3735

Icon 1 posted      Profile for BrandonP   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Another recent study on modern human evolution, this one on braincase changes...

Human brains rounded into shape over 200,000 years or more
quote:
Big brains outpaced well-rounded brains in human evolution.

Around the time of the origins of our species 300,000 years ago, the brains of Homo sapiens had about the same relatively large size as they do today, new research suggests. But rounder noggins rising well above the forehead — considered a hallmark of human anatomy — didn’t appear until between about 100,000 and 35,000 years ago, say physical anthropologist Simon Neubauer and his colleagues.

So the modern human braincases that all people today have would not have come about by the time of the new Israeli fossil from 194 kya. Therefore, I'm inclined to think that older population was a "dead end" for the most part.

--------------------
Brought to you by Brandon S. Pilcher

My art thread on ES

And my books thread

Posts: 7082 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Lulz. Cabrera et al have already become dated. I predicted this would happen. The authors were just asking for it. If you follow archaeology you know that the humans outside of Africa 130ky ago are nothing special in terms of leaving Africa prior to mtDNA M and N.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ha! HA! Ha! Isreal is 50ft from "Africa". SMH

"The oldest fossils of modern humans outside Africa have been discovered in Israel, a new study finds."


WTF is wrong with you people. You would think they found the specimen is China or something. Jeezus fugking christ!

--------------------
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
Linda Fahr
Suspended
Member # 21979

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Linda Fahr   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Indians & Chinese geneticists must be scratching their heads....What can do they do now? [Big Grin]

--------------------
---lnnnnn*

Posts: 198 | From: USA | Registered: Aug 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Linda Fahr
Suspended
Member # 21979

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Linda Fahr   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Indians & Chinese geneticists must be scratching their heads...What they may do next? [Big Grin]

--------------------
---lnnnnn*

Posts: 198 | From: USA | Registered: Aug 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
Lulz. Cabrera et al have already become dated. I predicted this would happen. The authors were just asking for it. If you follow archaeology you know that the humans outside of Africa 130ky ago are nothing special in terms of leaving Africa prior to mtDNA M and N.

There is a good possibility that 130ky old Skhul and Qafzeh folk are to some degree survivors of this ~200ky old OOA presence. The Skhul Qafzeh folk supposedly made tools that are indistinguishable from Neanderthal tools. This would be weird if they were MIS 5 arrivals from Africa, but it would not be so weird if part of their ancestry derives from that ~200ky old OOA presence. In that scenario I could see them ending up with more Neanderthal-like tools after mixing with archaics culturally and genetically over time.

Another possibility is that the Middle Palaeolithic Mousterian itself is an OOA culture, since it's fully analogous to developments that started much earlier in Africa (i.e. the MSA). So, (so far) we could have one OOA associated with the Mousterian (found among the Skhul-Qafzeh people), one OOA associated with the Amudian (found >200ky ago) and one OOA associated with the last interglacial, when we see African fauna in the Levant.

Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

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


http://science.sciencemag.org/content/359/6374/456

The earliest modern humans outside Africa

Israel Hershkovitz1,2,*,†, Gerhard W. Weber3,†, Rolf Quam4,5,6,†, Mathieu Duval7,8, Rainer Grün7,9, Leslie Kinsley9, Avner Ayalon10, Miryam Bar-Matthews10, Helene Valladas11, Norbert Mercier12, Juan Luis Arsuaga5,13, María Martinón-Torres8,14, José María Bermúdez de Castro8,14, Cinzia Fornai3,15, Laura Martín-Francés8,16, Rachel Sarig2,17, Hila May1,2, Viktoria A. Krenn3,15, Viviane Slon1, Laura Rodríguez5,18,19, Rebeca García5,18, Carlos Lorenzo20,21, Jose Miguel Carretero5,18, Amos Frumkin22, Ruth Shahack-Gross23, Daniella E. Bar-Yosef Mayer24,25, Yaming Cui26, Xinzhi Wu26, Natan Peled27, Iris Groman-Yaroslavski28, Lior Weissbrod28, Reuven Yeshurun28, Alexander Tsatskin28, Yossi Zaidner28,29, Mina Weinstein-Evron28


Science 26 Jan 2018:
Vol. 359, Issue 6374, pp. 456-459
DOI: 10.1126/science.aap8369


Earliest modern humans out of Africa

Recent paleoanthropological studies have suggested that modern humans migrated from Africa as early as the beginning of the Late Pleistocene, 120,000 years ago. Hershkovitz et al. now suggest that early modern humans were already present outside of Africa more than 55,000 years earlier (see the Perspective by Stringer and Galway-Witham). During excavations of sediments at Mount Carmel, Israel, they found a fossil of a mouth part, a left hemimaxilla, with almost complete dentition.

The sediments contain a series of well-defined hearths and a rich stone-based industry, as well as abundant animal remains. Analysis of the human remains, and dating of the site and the fossil itself, indicate a likely age of at least 177,000 years for the fossil—making it the oldest member of the Homo sapiens clade found outside Africa.

Science, this issue p. 456; see also p. 389

Abstract

To date, the earliest modern human fossils found outside of Africa are dated to around 90,000 to 120,000 years ago at the Levantine sites of Skhul and Qafzeh. A maxilla and associated dentition recently discovered at Misliya Cave, Israel, was dated to 177,000 to 194,000 years ago, suggesting that members of the Homo sapiens clade left Africa earlier than previously thought. This finding changes our view on modern human dispersal and is consistent with recent genetic studies, which have posited the possibility of an earlier dispersal of Homo sapiens around 220,000 years ago. The Misliya maxilla is associated with full-fledged Levallois technology in the Levant, suggesting that the emergence of this technology is linked to the appearance of Homo sapiens in the region, as has been documented in Africa.

Posts: 42935 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:
The Misliya maxilla is associated with full-fledged Levallois technology in the Levant, suggesting that the emergence of this technology is linked to the appearance of Homo sapiens in the region, as has been documented in Africa.

quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
Another possibility is that the Middle Palaeolithic Mousterian itself is an OOA culture, since it's fully analogous to developments that started much earlier in Africa (i.e. the MSA).

Good to see academics starting to consider this. Will read the full paper later.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
For those who don't understand the relevance yet, Cabrera et al's 130ky Skhul-Qafzeh population seemingly left Africa much earlier than 130ky ago. Or at least, an older Levantine human population they mixed with, did (although the fact that Skhul-Qafzeh are culturally related to older humans in the Levant suggests continuity between them is more likely than large scale admixture events with new OOA migrants in between both Levantine samples). Either way, whether Skhul-Qafzeh are related to the older Levantine humans through continuity, or with some new OOA admixture in between that >70ky gap, population replacement between the two populations seems unlikely, for reasons I just mentioned. I will confirm by reading the paper later, but I expect very close morphological affinities.

This collapses Cabrera et al's entire premise since the root of mtDNA phylogeny of living humans would have been closer to southern Africa, not in northern Africa or in Ethiopia as the recent papers are trying to say. People closely related to living humans arrived in North Africa no earlier than MIS 5 (unless branches died off that we can't detect genetically and archaeologically), but certainly not >200ky ago. This is why the oldest Y-DNAs (A00, A0 and A-M31) are found in between West/Central Africa and northern Africa, and not among Khoisan. This is likely also why the recent medieval Moroccan aDNA has no clear affinities to living humans, and are genetically closest to southern African populations. Southern Africans are genetically closer to the root of our tree, and therefore are also expected to have a vague pleisiomorphic type affinity to the older human branches that arrived in West/Central, North Africa and the Levant before any humans on our side of the human tree did (i.e. before mtDNA L0'6 and Y-DNA A2-T people did).

I already spoke on this in 2015 (my last blogpost), so these academics have no excuse. If I can put the pieces of the puzzles together, they should be able to do the same. Even though it's their profession, in 2018 Cabrera et al and most academics still have no clue about any of this, which shows how far academics can lag behind. At this point, some of them are just spreaders of misinformation in white lab coats. Very sad. This backmigration non sense that is being pushed right now (seemingly in concert) is going to take years to get rid of in the mainstream. Expect a lot of trolls and sore losers from multiregionalism latch on to this for a long time.

Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Askia_The_Great
Administrator
Member # 22000

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Askia_The_Great     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
For those who don't understand the relevance yet, Cabrera et al's 130ky Skhul-Qafzeh population seemingly left Africa much earlier than 130ky ago. Or at least, an older Levantine human population they mixed with, did (although the fact that Skhul-Qafzeh are culturally related to older humans in the Levant suggests continuity between them is more likely than large scale admixture events with new OOA migrants in between both Levantine samples). Either way, whether Skhul-Qafzeh are related to the older Levantine humans through continuity, or with some new OOA admixture in between that >70ky gap, population replacement between the two populations seems unlikely, for reasons I just mentioned. I will confirm by reading the paper later, but I expect very close morphological affinities.

This collapses Cabrera et al's entire premise since the root of mtDNA phylogeny of living humans would have been closer to southern Africa, not in northern Africa or in Ethiopia as the recent papers are trying to say. People closely related to living humans arrived in North Africa no earlier than MIS 5 (unless branches died off that we can't detect genetically and archaeologically), but certainly not >200ky ago. This is why the oldest Y-DNAs (A00, A0 and A-M31) are found in between West/Central Africa and northern Africa, and not among Khoisan. This is likely also why the recent medieval Moroccan aDNA has no clear affinities to living humans, and are genetically closest to southern African populations. Southern Africans are genetically closer to the root of our tree, and therefore are also expected to have a vague pleisiomorphic type affinity to the older human branches that arrived in West/Central, North Africa and the Levant before any humans on our side of the human tree did (i.e. before mtDNA L0'6 and Y-DNA A2-T people did).

I already spoke on this in 2015 (my last blogpost), so these academics have no excuse. If I can put the pieces of the puzzles together, they should be able to do the same. Even though it's their profession, in 2018 Cabrera et al and most academics still have no clue about any of this, which shows how far academics can lag behind. At this point, some of them are just spreaders of misinformation in white lab coats. Very sad. This backmigration non sense that is being pushed right now (seemingly in concert) is going to take years to get rid of in the mainstream. Expect a lot of trolls and sore losers from multiregionalism latch on to this for a long time.

I found the bolded to be eye catching. What study was that from?

But yea it does seem like the mainstream ignores Southern and West-Central Africa when it comes to talking about the oldest human lineages.

Correct me but it seems Cabrera et al didn't pay much attention to Schlebusch et al.

Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

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

http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=009466;p=1

Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Genomes in Medieval North Africa (Gunther et al, 2016)


--


Hmmm. Another "unpublished" study. This paper would have clarified so many things. 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 | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
Genomes in Medieval North Africa (Gunther et al, 2016)


--


Hmmm. Another "unpublished" study. This paper would have clarified so many things. SMH.

Agree. I want to see it tested how much African ancestry various Eurasians have when tested against these populations. I think a lot of so-called 'pure' components are going to turn out to be mixed. Basal Eurasian all over again. Except this time they won't be able to say "Basal Eurasian were essentially Eurasian".
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Indeed the aDNA of pre-historic Africans will clarify so many things. We are already seeing this taking shape with Malawi-Hora-8100BP. The geographic location of Malawi-Hora indicates that by Mid-Holocene(6000BC) may be 80% of Sub-Sahara Africa already had “European”/Eurasian AIM. So Pagani’s claim about back-migration to East Africa 3000years ago is almost irrelevant.

I would like to see Malawi-Hora-8100 line up against La Brana, Loschbour and some Early Neolithic Europeans like Otzi with unsupervised cluster charts.

--------------------
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 is obvious the release of results are being controlled. But one of these guys(researchers) is going to break ranks eventually. Or an “independent” corporation will just to do it. DNATribes is dead and it seems DNAConsultants has folded under pressure.

I saw that the cost these of high tech DNA processing equipment is dropping fast . Maybe less than $200,000. Of course the personnel and lab are additional cost. I assume DNAConsultants and the like have over 100 of these constantly running testing the public samples. All is needed is one and a small staff. They charge $100 a pop! So it not too expensive for ONE analysis.

In fact I was thinking of downloading the Abusir BAM files, process it and upload to anonymously as a *.gz or VCF. What you think ElMaestro, AstenB or Capra or anyone? Will this work to get some answers?

--------------------
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 
Some of you may remember what DNAConsultants did with the Amarnas STR. Almost all STR from the Amarnas were indigenously Africans. While some of you were tormenting DNATribes we forgot DNAConsultants also identified the Amarnas as Africans.

There has to be a way to process the Abusir's to clearly identify their locale

--------------------
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
capra
Member
Member # 22737

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for capra     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
The geographic location of Malawi-Hora indicates that by Mid-Holocene(6000BC) may be 80% of Sub-Sahara Africa already had “European”/Eurasian AIM. So Pagani’s claim about back-migration to East Africa 3000years ago is almost irrelevant.

What on earth are you talking about? Malawi_Hora isn't Eurasian at all, falls on a cline between Mota and ancestral South Africans.
Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017  |  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:
It is obvious the release of results are being controlled. But one of these guys(researchers) is going to break ranks eventually. Or an “independent” corporation will just to do it. DNATribes is dead and it seems DNAConsultants has folded under pressure.

I saw that the cost these of high tech DNA processing equipment is dropping fast . Maybe less than $200,000. Of course the personnel and lab are additional cost. I assume DNAConsultants and the like have over 100 of these constantly running testing the public samples. All is needed is one and a small staff. They charge $100 a pop! So it not too expensive for ONE analysis.

In fact I was thinking of downloading the Abusir BAM files, process it and upload to anonymously as a *.gz or VCF. What you think ElMaestro, AstenB or Capra or anyone? Will this work to get some answers?

Don't waste your time.
anything that could've possibly be beneficial to your theory was extracted already and uploaded through various sources.

...btw. why would you upload a gunzipped file, matterfact, how would you even create one from a BAM file? lol

Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Askia_The_Great
Administrator
Member # 22000

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Askia_The_Great     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
^See here:

http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=009466;p=1

Appreciate it.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dinkum
Banned
Member # 22875

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Dinkum         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
DNATRIBES NEVER took any DNA from any Egyptian mummies. You wont find their results ON ANY GENUINE SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH SITES.
It was nothing but a publicity stunt.

Posts: 108 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2018  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dinkum
Banned
Member # 22875

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Dinkum         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
As for Homo-Sapiens found outside of Africa, a 200 000 year old Neanderthal found in Germany carried human DNA:

https://www.sciencealert.com/this-neanderthal-s-dna-is-evidence-of-a-lost-tribe-of-humans

This nonsense that there was only one migration out of Africa needs to die!

Posts: 108 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2018  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dinkum
Banned
Member # 22875

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Dinkum         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The first modern human has been found in Morocco and dated 300 000 years. This bullshit story modern humans originated in Ethiopia NEEDS TO DIE:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/ancient-fossils-from-morocco-mess-up-modern-human-origins/

Posts: 108 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2018  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
Indeed the aDNA of pre-historic Africans will clarify so many things. We are already seeing this taking shape with Malawi-Hora-8100BP. The geographic location of Malawi-Hora indicates that by Mid-Holocene(6000BC) may be 80% of Sub-Sahara Africa already had “European”/Eurasian AIM. So Pagani’s claim about back-migration to East Africa 3000years ago is almost irrelevant.

I would like to see Malawi-Hora-8100 line up against La Brana, Loschbour and some Early Neolithic Europeans like Otzi with unsupervised cluster charts.

For this to work (i.e. finding undiscovered ghost populations in Eurasia that derive from older human branches like Y-DNA A00), we'd have to have African samples with some sort of pre-Toba OOA ancestry. Mota has some of it, judging by his affities to South Indians and Asians in general. But I don't think all SSA aDNA will have it. The Moroccan aDNA is promising because the lack of clear modern affinities hints at those older human branches that spread around the world before people more closely related to us did (see my previous post). Plus, the Moroccan sample is found near Eurasia.

Affinity to Asians may be the best test of this ghost population we have so far.

MOTA's Affinity to E Eurasians
https://anthrogenica.com/archive/index.php/t-6165.html

If the Hora, Chencherere and Fingira samples have a lot of this ancestry, it should show with this test, or a similar test.

Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I was looking into different software that can do conversions from one format to others. Many online companies will take uploads and send you information on locale and other reports.

quote:
Originally posted by Elmaestro:
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
It is obvious the release of results are being controlled. But one of these guys(researchers) is going to break ranks eventually. Or an “independent” corporation will just to do it. DNATribes is dead and it seems DNAConsultants has folded under pressure.

I saw that the cost these of high tech DNA processing equipment is dropping fast . Maybe less than $200,000. Of course the personnel and lab are additional cost. I assume DNAConsultants and the like have over 100 of these constantly running testing the public samples. All is needed is one and a small staff. They charge $100 a pop! So it not too expensive for ONE analysis.

In fact I was thinking of downloading the Abusir BAM files, process it and upload to anonymously as a *.gz or VCF. What you think ElMaestro, AstenB or Capra or anyone? Will this work to get some answers?

Don't waste your time.
anything that could've possibly be beneficial to your theory was extracted already and uploaded through various sources.

...btw. why would you upload a gunzipped file, matterfact, how would you even create one from a BAM file? 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 
GPS software uses *.gz file amongst others. They are my best bet I got my results within 15mins after uploading from a another DNASite!!!! I am not sure how accurate it was but it put my ancestral home (aside from my small 1800's British connection maybe tied to the Louisiana purchase I was told) to Senegal and Madagascar. I had no idea I had Madagascar connection. But I think the GPS software is the way to go. It may accurately place the Abusir. If DNATribes or DNAConsultants had not cowered we will know by now.

--------------------
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 think this "ghost" population(pre-A00/Pre-Toba) has been identified by Skoglund(he mentioned an African substrate that existed BEFORE the Nilo-Saharan migration. And this is one if the few things I agree with Dinkum, yes, North Africa or Southern Africa could quite possible be the home our Species and not East Africa. The "second" migration OOA probably occurred in/from East Africa.


BTW - Skoglund describe this ghost population occurring AFTER the split of AMH and Neanderthals but BEFORE the split of Khoi-San

quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:
O.

I would like to see Malawi-Hora-8100 line up against La Brana, Loschbour and some Early Neolithic Europeans like Otzi with unsupervised cluster charts.

For this to work (i.e. finding undiscovered ghost populations in Eurasia that derive from older human branches like Y-DNA A00), we'd have to have African samples with some sort of pre-Toba OOA ancestry. Mota has some of it, judging by his affities to South Indians and Asians in general. But I don't think all SSA aDNA will have it. The Moroccan aDNA is promising because the lack of clear modern affinities hints at those older human branches that spread around the world before people more closely related to us did (see my previous post). Plus, the Moroccan sample is found near Eurasia.

Affinity to Asians may be the best test of this ghost population we have so far.

MOTA's Affinity to E Eurasians
https://anthrogenica.com/archive/index.php/t-6165.html

If the Hora, Chencherere and Fingira samples have a lot of this ancestry, it should show with this test, or a similar test. [/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
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
SMH. Who said Malawi-hora was "EurAsian"? I said MIXED with Eurasian. Meaning "Eurasian" ancestry was deep in Southern Africa BEFORE the Early Neolithic. That is why Skoglund speculated that the ancestral home of the Neolithics was NOT the Near East but somewhere in Africa

 -


quote:
Originally posted by capra:
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
The geographic location of Malawi-Hora indicates that by Mid-Holocene(6000BC) may be 80% of Sub-Sahara Africa already had “European”/Eurasian AIM. So Pagani’s claim about back-migration to East Africa 3000years ago is almost irrelevant.

What on earth are you talking about? Malawi_Hora isn't Eurasian at all, falls on a cline between Mota and ancestral South 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 
Hominin evolution and gene flow in the Pleistocene Africa - Ovchinnikov, Igor V.

DOI: 10.1127/0003-5548/2013/0313

Abstract
Africa demonstrates a complex process of the hominin evolution with a series of adaptive radiations during several millions of years that led to diverse morphological forms. Recently, Hammer et al. (2011) and Harvati et al. (2011) provided integrated morphological and genetic evidence of interbreeding between modern humans and unknown archaic hominins in Africa as recently as 35,000 years ago. However, a genetic evidence of hybridization between hominin lineages during the Lower and Middle Pleistocene epochs is unknown and the direct retrieval of DNA from extinct lineages of African hominins remains elusive. The availability of both nuclear and mitochondrial genome sequences from modern humans, Neanderthals, and Denisovans allows collecting nuclear DNA sequences of mitochondrial origin (numts) inserted into the nuclear genome of the ancestral hominin lineages and drawing conclusions about the hominin evolution in the remote past. The mtDNA and numt analysis uncovered a deep division of mtDNA lineages that existed in African hominins in the Middle Pleistocene. The*** first cluster*** included the human and Neanderthal-like mtDNA sequences while the second consisted of DNA sequences that are known today as mtAncestor-1, a nuclear fossil of the mtDNA, and the Denisova mtDNA isolated from a bone and a tooth found in southern Siberia. The two groups initially diverged 610,000-1,110,000 years ago. Approximately 220,000 years after the primary split, the Denisova - mtAncestor-1 mtDNA lineages mixed with the mtDNA pool of an ***ancestral population of ***(both)Neanderthals and modern humans. This admixture after the profound division is demonstrated by the transposition of the Denisova-like mtDNA sequence into the nuclear genome of an ancestor of Neanderthals and modern humans. This finding suggests the matrilineal genetic structure among the Middle Pleistocene hominins as well as the existence of gene flow between African hominin lineages. Through paleogenomic analyses, it is impossible to exclude the theory that population structure and gene flow in African hominins influenced the admixture pattern observed in the nuclear genomes of non-Africans.

-----
In other words. Neanderthal, Humans and Denisovan did not have an orgy. Lol! It looks like Denisovan split first from humans/Neanderthals. Then Neanderthals followed by AMH

--------------------
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
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
In other words. Neanderthal, Humans and Denisovan did not have an orgy. Lol! It looks like Denisovan split first from humans/Neanderthals. Then Neanderthals followed by AMH

Thanks for the paper (they make some interesting observations), but it's dated. The Neanderthal-human clade they're talking about is 100% AMH. In other words, it just represents another OOA migration of AMH ~410ky ago. The mtDNAs of this OOA migration got preserved in the Neanderthal mtDNA pool, making it look like they split off from us more recently than Denisovans. They didn't. They just inherited very old branches of the human tree, which didn't survive in living humans (see my comments above about early humans roaming the world before people more closely related to us, did).

https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms16046.pdf

It's possible that the Amudian OOA migration I mentioned above represents this 410ky OOA migration. There are not enough dates to say for sure yet. (But the Amudian OOA migration for sure predates the Skhul-Qafzeh OOA migration).

The 410ky date derived from this human-Neanderthal clade certainly seems to be an important date, since it also marks the beginning of new OOA cultures in the archaeological record:

quote:
Furthermore, its geographical position in the Levant, as a connection between the African and European continents, defines Qesem Cave as a crucial site for understanding dynamic evolutions of hominins.Qesem Cave is located 12 km east of Tel Aviv, at an elevation of 90 m.a.s.l. and it is dated to 420-200ka, with the U/Th method, from speleothems present in the cave.Lithic industries is assigned to the Acheulo-Yabrudian Cultural Complex, present only in the center and south of the Levant between 400 and 200ka.
http://www.antichita.uniroma1.it/LTFAPA/phd-projects-and-dissertations.html
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
capra
Member
Member # 22737

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for capra     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
SMH. Who said Malawi-hora was "EurAsian"? I said MIXED with Eurasian. Meaning "Eurasian" ancestry was deep in Southern Africa BEFORE the Early Neolithic. That is why Skoglund speculated that the ancestral home of the Neolithics was NOT the Near East but somewhere in Africa

 -

What you see at K=2 or K=3 is *not* Eurasian admixture, and nobody but you thinks it is. The recent West Eurasian ancestry in Africa can be seen more-or-less at K=6 as the yellow component, and at K=7 as the yellow and part of the red.
Once Mota gets his own component there is no more yellow component in Malawi either, so zero evidence of actual Eurasian ancestry.

Mota has *no* Eurasian (unless some really ancient unrecognizable kind) according to formal stats. On the other hand, Luxmanda and South_Africa_1200BP *do* have West Eurasian in qpAdm as well as in this ADMIXTURE run at K=6-7.

My guess is that Skoglund et al mentioned the PPNB-like ancestry could come from Africa because North Africa is an obvious logical possibility. They sure as hell aren't talking about low K ADMIXTURE components.

Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017  |  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 
@Swenet and others

-I never really questioned the existence of Neanderthals. I took it as a given because it has been said many times but after reading this piece and from little I know about the genome of Neanderthals I am having doubts now. I never really followed deeply Neanderthal DNA stories. But there are lies in here again. Man! These Europeans. I am wondering if there was ever a Neanderthal “species”? From what they are saying some Neanderthal carry AMH DNA but not others. Wouldn’t that not make Neanderthal a “single” species. Is there BS and lies in here?

--------------
Quote from
Deeply divergent archaic mitochondrial genome provides lower time boundary for African gene flow into Neanderthals-Cosimo Posth1

Discussion
The African introgression hypothesis suggests that Late Pleistocene Neanderthal mtDNAs originated through gene flow from
an African source8,
which we constrain taking place more than B270 ka (Table 1). Our analytical calculations (Supplementary Table 8 and Supplementary Note 5) show that this event is
plausible even if the introgressing lineage represented a minimal proportion of the initial gene pool. This scenario reconciles
the discrepancy in the nDNA and mtDNA phylogenies of archaic hominins and the inconsistency of the modern human–
Neanderthal population split time estimated from nDNA and mtDNA (Fig. 1d).
Under this demographical model, the
Denisovan mtDNA type was common among early Neanderthals in Eurasia (for example, Sima de los Huesos) and was then largely
replaced by an introgressing African mtDNA that evolved into the Late Pleistocene Neanderthal mtDNA type.
While the upper
bound for the time of this putative gene flow event would be the divergence time between Neanderthal and modern human
mtDNAs, here dated to 413 ka (95% HPD 468–360 ka), the lower temporal limit was represented so far by the B160 ka
TMRCA of all published Neanderthal mtDNAs (Table 1). However, the finding of the deeply diverged HST lineage
splitting from the Altai branch, B270 ka, sets an older lower boundary for the time of this admixture event. An **alternative**
but less parsimonious scenario is that both HST and Altai mtDNA lineages reached Eurasia independently after diverging
inside Africa.
In that case the suggested introgression event might have occurred later but most likely before 160 ka, our
estimated date for the start of the Altai branch diversification (Fig. 1c and Table 1).
The presence of modern human admixture into archaic humans*** has already been detected in the high coverage
Neanderthal genome*** from the Altai region but ****NOT***** in sequences of chromosome 21 of two Neanderthals from Spain and
Croatia14.
The authors therefore suggested that a genomic contribution estimated between 0.1 and 2.1% occurred after the
divergence of Altai from other late Neanderthals. However, there is a high level of uncertainty around the time of the inferred gene
flow event since only one high coverage Neanderthal nuclear genome has been analysed so far. Moreover, the divergence
time of the introgressing African population was estimated to date before or right after the TMRCA of modern-day humans
(B200 ka)14,
---------------

--------------------
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 
Yeah talk yourself into Mota has no "Eurasian DNA when it is s foregone conclusion.

More European sleight of hands.

To the Newbies -
K2 = African and non-African
K3= African, European(sardinian) and East Asian(Japanese is used as a proxy)
K4= etc 4 populations etc....

As I said Malawi-Hora_8100Bp is the bigger problem not Luzummanda.

quote:
Originally posted by capra:
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
SMH. Who said Malawi-hora was "EurAsian"? I said MIXED with Eurasian. Meaning "Eurasian" ancestry was deep in Southern Africa BEFORE the Early Neolithic. That is why Skoglund speculated that the ancestral home of the Neolithics was NOT the Near East but somewhere in Africa

 -

What you see at K=2 or K=3 is *not* Eurasian admixture, and nobody but you thinks it is. The recent West Eurasian ancestry in Africa can be seen more-or-less at K=6 as the yellow component, and at K=7 as the yellow and part of the red.
Once Mota gets his own component there is no more yellow component in Malawi either, so zero evidence of actual Eurasian ancestry.

Mota has *no* Eurasian (unless some really ancient unrecognizable kind) according to formal stats. On the other hand, Luxmanda and South_Africa_1200BP *do* have West Eurasian in qpAdm as well as in this ADMIXTURE run at K=6-7.

My guess is that Skoglund et al mentioned the PPNB-like ancestry could come from Africa because North Africa is an obvious logical possibility. They sure as hell aren't talking about low K ADMIXTURE components.



--------------------
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
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
[QB] @Swenet and others

-I never really questioned the existence of Neanderthals. I took it as a given because it has been said many times but after reading this piece and from little I know about the genome of Neanderthals I am having doubts now. I never really followed deeply Neanderthal DNA stories. But there are lies in here again. Man! These Europeans. I am wondering if there was ever a Neanderthal “species”? From what they are saying some Neanderthal carry AMH DNA but not others. Wouldn’t that not make Neanderthal a “single” species. Is there BS and lies in here?

Lol. It's not that deep, gramps. In the paper they say that Neanderthals have far less autosomal African ancestry than they have African mtDNAs:

quote:
We demonstrate that
a complete Neanderthal mtDNA replacement is feasible over this time interval even with
minimal hominin introgression.

Neanderthals still exist, but we now know that we cannot take it for granted that all Neanderthal features are necessarily purely Neanderthal. They didn't evolve in isolation from old human branches that left Africa.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I noticed Dienekes has comments in this topic


quote:


http://dienekes.blogspot.com/

The sensational discovery of modern humans in the Levant 177-194 thousand years ago should cause a rethink of the currently held Out-of-Africa orthodoxy.

By Out-of-Africa, I mean here the origin of anatomically modern humans, as opposed to the earlier origin of the genus Homo or the later origin of behaviorally fully modern humans.

Two main pieces of evidence supported the conventional OOA theory:

1. The observation that modern Eurasians possess a subset of the genetic variation of modern Africans.
2. The greater antiquity of AMH humans in the African rather than the Eurasian palaeoanthropological record.

Both these observations are in crisis.

1a. The oldest African fossil AMH is in North Africa (Morocco, Jebel Irhoud); modern genetic variation does not single out this region as a potential source of modern humans. In short, modern genetic variation has nothing to say about where AMH originated.
1b. Eurasians can no longer be seen as a subset of Africans, given that they possess genetic variation from Denisovans, a layer of ancestry earlier than all extant AMH. While it is still true that most Eurasian genetic material is a subset of that of modern Africans, it is also true that the deepest known lineage of humans is the Denisovan-Sima de los huesos, with no evidence for any deeper African lineage. Within humans as a whole, Africans possess a subset of Eurasian genetic variation.
2a. African priority received a boost by 0.1My by the redating of Jebel Irhoud last year. And, non-African AMH received a boost of 0.05My by the Hershkovitz et al. paper yesterday. A very short time ago, Ethiopia boasted the oldest AMH by 0.07My and now it's tied with the Levant and beaten by Morocco. It's a bit silly to argue for temporal priority based on the spotty and ever-shifting palaeoanthropological record.
2b. It is virtually untenable to consider the ~120,000 year old Shkul/Qafzeh hominins as a failed Out-of-Africa, since it now seems that they may have been descendants from the Mislya Cave population of >50,000 or even >100,000 years earlier.

I had previously supported a "two deserts" theory of human origins in which AMH originated in North Africa (Sahara) and then left Africa >100kya as evidenced by the Shkul/Qafzeh hominins and/or the Nubian technocomplex in Arabia. While I am still convinced that AMH originated somewhere in North Africa or the Near East, I am less certain as to where.

Science 26 Jan 2018: Vol. 359, Issue 6374, pp. 456-459 DOI: 10.1126/science.aap8369

The earliest modern humans outside Africa



Posts: 42935 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
capra
Member
Member # 22737

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for capra     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
Yeah talk yourself into Mota has no "Eurasian DNA when it is s foregone conclusion.

More European sleight of hands.

To the Newbies -
K2 = African and non-African
K3= African, European(sardinian) and East Asian(Japanese is used as a proxy)
K4= etc 4 populations etc....

supposing there actually are any lurking newbies, xyyman is wrong as usual. just because you *can* tell the computer to model the populations as a neat mix of 2 or 3 ancestral populations using this algorithm doesn't mean the program can actually come up with accurate results to be taken literally. it can't. i could tell the computer to model you as a mix of mushrooms and dandelions, you'd probably come out as mostly mushroom with a bit of dandelion. for human history at low K it will give contradictory answers depending on how many and how closely related individuals you put in from which populations. which you can easily see if you bother to actually read any papers.

Mota is exactly equidistant between Han and Sardinian with D stats, obviously K=3 yellow component is not actually European

using qpAdm (table S5 in Skoglund et al) Malawi_Hora is modelled as 53% ancestral South African, 47% Mota. To be precise the East African side should be slightly less related to Dinka than Mota is.

not that xyyman will pay the slightest attention to any of this of course [Big Grin] since this is only very tenuously connected to the topic i won't do any further sidetracking.

Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017  |  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 
Capra said:
"blah blah! blah! High frequency qpAdm ! Frequency! blah! blah! spin! spin! deflection! blah!"

Skoglund said:
"Quote: “We found that the _3,100 BP individual (Tanzania_Luxmanda_3100BP), associated with a Savanna Pastoral Neolithic archeological tradition, could be modeled as having 38% ± 1% of her ancestry related to the nearly 10,000- year-old pre-pottery farmers of the Levant (Lazaridis et al., 2016), and we can **exclude **source populations related to early farmer populations in Iran and Anatolia. These results could be explained by migration into Africa from descendants of pre-pottery Levantine farmers or alternatively by a scenario in which BOTH pre-pottery Levantine farmers and Tanzania_Luxmanda_
3100BP descend from a common ancestral population that lived thousands of years earlier ********in********* Africa
or the Near East. We fit the remaining approximately two-thirds of Tanzania_Luxmanda_ 3100BP as most closely related to the Ethiopia_4500BP (p = 0.029) or, allowing for three-way mixture, also from a source closely related to the Dinka (p = 0.18; the Levantine-related ancestry in this case was 39% ± 1%) (Table S4).”

Read more: http://egyptsearchreloaded.proboards.com/thread/2543/reconstructing-prehistoric-african-population-structure#ixzz56AQzReG8

--------------------
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 
But we know Skoglund is lying and spinnng! Why? Malawi_Hora_8100BP carried "modern European" ancestry! For those who are slow....LaBrana did NOT carry "European" ancestry.

In other words The sub-saharan South African from Malawi Hora carried European ancestry BEFORE the ancient European La Brana!!!!!!

So what the F is Capra babbling about?...qpAdm D Sat etc??!! This is simpler than we are making out to be.

--------------------
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] But we know Skoglund is lying and spinnng! Why? Malawi_Hora_8100BP carried "modern European" ancestry! For those who are slow....LaBrana did NOT carry "European" ancestry.


-keep in mind xyyman believes there is no such thing as a European or non-African haplogroup
Posts: 42935 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
But we know Skoglund is lying and spinnng! Why? Malawi_Hora_8100BP carried "modern European" ancestry! For those who are slow....LaBrana did NOT carry "European" ancestry.


-keep in mind xyyman believes there is no such thing as a European or non-African haplogroup
Well, it still needs to be explained why Africans have different proportions of that yellow. It clearly is something and the yellow component occurs in a pattern (samples closer to the Indian Ocean and more to the north seemingly have more of it). Xyyman eccentric views elsewhere about European ancestry don't take away from that.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Aha! Yet again. Mbutis are ****Nilo****-Saharan speakers. Look at their "European" AIM. Same proportion in ALL samples of Mbuti. Indicative of? No a National Geographic camera man did not "sleep" with a pygmy woman. lol!

Consistent ANCIENT ancestry.

Yeah...believe the hype. SMH

As I said the least of their problem is Tanzanian Luxumanda 3100bp. Luxmanda is a smoke screen. The BIGGER problem is Malawi_Hora-8100BP carrying "sardinian" ancestry. Those of you will know....Sardinian is representative of the relic Neolithic to enter Europe.

--------------------
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 
^ Blah, Blah Blah, Neolithic


--------------------
Without data there's nothing to spin and misunderstand - xyyman

Posts: 42935 | 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 
yes...sista

quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
^ Blah, Blah Blah, Neolithic


--------------------
Without data there's nothing to spin and misunderstand - xyyman



--------------------
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 
If you can't describe what you are doing as a process, you don't know what you're doing - Deming
Posts: 42935 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
capra
Member
Member # 22737

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for capra     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
the yellow is under no obligation to be the *same* something at each K.

i'm not saying that there *couldn't* be Out-of-Africa Prequel Spinoff or Basal Basal Eurasian or something floating around, but odd bits of yellow component in this ADMIXTURE run can at best inspire a hypothesis.

lol xyyman clearly any method beyond ADMIXTURE is a lie and deception. selected xyyman appproved runs only. in the end Lemuria must triumph.

Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mansamusa
Member
Member # 22474

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Mansamusa     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
If you can't describe what you are doing as a process, you don't know what you're doing - Deming

How does paraphrasing and directly quoting Skoglund (2017) to demonstrate "Eurasian" admixture in ancient Africans represent "not knowing what you're doing?"
Posts: 288 | From: Asia | Registered: Mar 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 
quote:
Originally posted by Mansamusa:
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
If you can't describe what you are doing as a process, you don't know what you're doing - Deming

How does paraphrasing and directly quoting Skoglund (2017) to demonstrate "Eurasian" admixture in ancient Africans represent "not knowing what you're doing?"
pay attention,

quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
we know Skoglund is lying and spinnng!

--------------------
W. Edwards Deming quote

Posts: 42935 | 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 
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
Aha! Yet again. Mbutis are ****Nilo****-Saharan speakers. Look at their "European" AIM. Same proportion in ALL samples of Mbuti. Indicative of? No a National Geographic camera man did not "sleep" with a pygmy woman. lol!

Consistent ANCIENT ancestry.

Yeah...believe the hype. SMH

As I said the least of their problem is Tanzanian Luxumanda 3100bp. Luxmanda is a smoke screen. The BIGGER problem is Malawi_Hora-8100BP carrying "sardinian" ancestry. Those of you will know....Sardinian is representative of the relic Neolithic to enter Europe.

You lost me here.

..anywho, Why not expand your theory, repeating the same thing over and over wont win over he skeptics. You should graduate to explaining the population history of African HGs. Complete the story using the plethora of evidence and clues available on ES. some of which you've posted before.

You familiar with the following quotes?
quote:
"The f3 statistics show the general presence of ancient Eurasian and/or Khoesan ancestry across much of sub-Saharan Africa. We tentatively interpret these results as being consistent with recent research suggesting very old (>10 kya) migrations back into Africa from Eurasia (Hodgson et al., 2014a), with the ubiquitous hunter-gatherer ancestry across the continent possibly related to the inhabitant populations present across Africa prior to these more recent movements. Future research involving ancient DNA from multiple African populations will help to further characterise these observations"
10.7554/eLife.15266 19 of 44

[...]

"In this work, we find that the genetic composition of non-African ancestry in the HOA is distinct from the genetic composition of current populations in North Africa and the Middle East. With these data, we demonstrate that most non-African ancestry in the HOA cannot be the result of admixture within the last few thousand years, and that the majority of admixture probably occurred prior to the advent of agriculture. These results contribute to a growing body of work showing that prehistoric hunter-gatherer populations were much more dynamic than usually assumed."
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1004393


Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by capra:
the yellow is under no obligation to be the *same* something at each K.

Assuming this is in response to my post to lioness, the samples range from 0% to >50% affinity with the Sardinian sample at K=3. Are you really trying to argue that the yellow is not obligated to stable across unmixed Africans populations, or absent, if there is not really something going on there?

So, in your view, this yellow gradient at k=3 could happen, even if there is nothing going on here (i.e. no real asymmetric closeness to Eurasians)?

Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
No fool. All Cluster charts when unsupervised shows the same pattern. Does **not** matter which researchers runs the analysis. I have read MANY papers by different researchers. They now play the supervised cluster charts game.

I remember I asked Davidski one time to run TreeMix analysis to prove my point. He said he will did came back a few days later to backed out the agreement. Instead he deleted the post(s).


"***Basal Basal Eurasian or something floating around***" - lol! man you white liberals!

quote:
Originally posted by capra:
the yellow is under no obligation to be the *same* something at each K.

i'm not saying that there *couldn't* be Out-of-Africa Prequel Spinoff or Basal Basal Eurasian or something floating around, but odd bits of yellow component in this ADMIXTURE run can at best inspire a hypothesis.

lol xyyman clearly any method beyond ADMIXTURE is a lie and deception. selected xyyman appproved runs only. in the end Lemuria must triumph.



--------------------
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 2 pages: 1  2   

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