posted
I think xxyyman and Clyde Winters are about to have an epileptic feat:
"Supervised clustering or projection analysis is a staple technique in population genetic analysis. The utility of this technique depends critically on the reference panel. The most commonly used reference panel in the analysis of ancient DNA to date is based on the Human Origins array. We previously described a larger reference panel that captures more ancestries on the global level. Here, I reanalyzed DNA data from 279 ancient Eurasians using our reference panel, finding substantially more ancestral heterogeneity than has been reported. This reanalysis provides evidence against a resurgence of Western hunter-gatherer ancestry in the Middle to Late Neolithic and evidence for a common ancestor of farmers characterized by Western Asian ancestry, a transition of the spread of agriculture from demic to cultural diffusion, at least two migrations between the Pontic-Caspian steppes and Bronze Age Europe, and a sub-Saharan African component in Natufians that localizes to present-day southern Ethiopia " Negroid NatufiansPosts: 288 | From: Asia | Registered: Mar 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not seeing the controversy as they've pointed out that these relatively new people where closely connected to Africans as oppose to the negritos or Australian Aborigine type people.
Posts: 1123 | From: New York | Registered: Feb 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hm, so Natufians (the ones that were sequenced) are 29% African... Interesting.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hey Man. (I haven't read the paper) It does not matter how much Europeans lie or twist the data. I knew I am 100% right since I read Sergi 7-10years ago. Sergi blew my mind. Of course he did not have aDNA back then so he did not understand the the "Negroids' are and were part of the Neolithic Expansion. And i was surprised to learn Coon came to nearly the same conclusion. AfroCentrics don't like Coon so I did not read his work back then. Then I read his with an open mind. All merging data from DNA thus far has proved they were correct. That is why I am ALWAYS 100% correct. Geography don't lie!!!! It is nearly an impossible navigation feat for West Europeans to originate in the supposed "near East". Africans entered West Europe from Morocco and Tunisia area. That is a fact no matter how they spin it.
The really surprising thing(to me) is how recent the data shows it was. 2-3000bc taking Skoglund into the equation?
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
This has been a BAD early year for Eurocentrics AND on Black History Month... The Abusir study was their only real celebration. lol.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
As I said. Some of these researchers will break ranks eventually. Eventually Africans and other nations will get the tools to perform their own aDNA studies. The lies will be exposed. There will be a tidal wave and fall out. Achilli, Paabo and others will be turning in their graves. Lying racists!!! I mentioned Henn is playing both sides. Look at her recent work on SLC24A5 in Khoi-Sans. She is straddling the fence. She may break ranks for her name to be always remembered…Thomas Jefferson?
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Man this shyte is coming in Tidal waves. :D I can't keep up processing all this studies coming out.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
No The Abusir paper was not a triumph for Euronuts either. Why? Because they did not include the most geographically logical population in that study. They ***excluded*** Great Lakes Africans. The very population that the Amarnas align with. Instead they chose the distant YRI to represent SSA. People seem to forget the Great Lakes Africans carry all the upstream clades found in the Abusir mummies. In addition the abusir did NOT cluster with typical modern "near East" peoples.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have to read the paper and get back to you. Too many new studies out there. wow. Still working on E-M2.....but I see ElMaestro got it down. I need to double check his assertions when I get the time.
quote:Originally posted by capra: hey xyyman this is unsupervised right? with STRs? lol
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: Hm, so Natufians (the ones that were sequenced) are 29% African... Interesting.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
ok so these are results we discussed in 2016. many posts were made about the puzzle of the Natufians and how they showed African components in ADMIXTURE but it didn't show up in D stats.
this paper 6.8% Omotic EthioHelix 7.9% Omotic Eurogenes K15 6.9% Northeast African
results are not novel because someone uploaded them to biorxiv in 2018.
What is notable is the implications on North African Ancestry when My Model is considered. The numbers are pretty close, That Fregel White is looking a lot less Back Migraty to me by the day.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: No The Abusir paper was not a triumph for Euronuts either. Why? Because they did not include the most geographically logical population in that study. They ***excluded*** Great Lakes Africans.
Which Great Lakes Africans.....or ethnic linguistic Africans would you like to have been included in the analysis?
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Cass/Dinkum is back...@Dinkum can you cite some RECENT studies instead of outdated stuff. Word of advice on a topic look at the *****date**** of publication. AIn addtion try to understand teh context of the studies instead of mouthing -off about Eurasian etc. You do know European DNA is of RECENT African origin?
Anyways, which Great Lakes Africans?
How about from Tanzania up to Sudan including Horners.
We know that the Luyha carry "Eurasian" ancestry. Even the untouched Hadza and Sandawe carry more Eurasian ancestry than AFRAMS.
That's right continue to play it like you are a dummy.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
XYYMAN - This is why it’s hard to take you seriously. Did you actually READ the publication? Go to page 3 or the supplement.
MOTA, Dinka, Datog, Ethiopian Jews, Kenyan Bantu, Hadza, Kikiyu, Luhya, Lou, Maasai, Oromo, Somali, Sandawe......and a Slew of West Africans and South Africans were included.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mansamusa: I think xxyyman and Clyde Winters are about to have an epileptic feat:
"Supervised clustering or projection analysis is a staple technique in population genetic analysis. The utility of this technique depends critically on the reference panel. The most commonly used reference panel in the analysis of ancient DNA to date is based on the Human Origins array. We previously described a larger reference panel that captures more ancestries on the global level. Here, I reanalyzed DNA data from 279 ancient Eurasians using our reference panel, finding substantially more ancestral heterogeneity than has been reported. This reanalysis provides evidence against a resurgence of Western hunter-gatherer ancestry in the Middle to Late Neolithic and evidence for a common ancestor of farmers characterized by Western Asian ancestry, a transition of the spread of agriculture from demic to cultural diffusion, at least two migrations between the Pontic-Caspian steppes and Bronze Age Europe, and a sub-Saharan African component in Natufians that localizes to present-day southern Ethiopia " Negroid Natufians
.
.
quote: The Natufian sample consisted of 61.2% Arabian, 21.2% Northern African, 10.9% Western 12 Asian, and 6.8% Omotic ancestry (Figure 1F and Table 1).
this = "Negroid" ^ , one drop rule
Posts: 42925 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
@AstenB You know you never fail to surprise me ...WTF are you talking about . Sup Fig4 do NOT have a comparison of Abusir with Great Lakes Africans. WT.... The bottom chart includes the Abusir against "some' Near East populations looks like @K4. WTF. Great Lake Africans are NOT included but one Horner group was included...Somali. Of the few populations included @K4 the BedoiunB are closest to the Abusir in that chart.
In addition to that Fig 4 in the main article has the closest match to Abusir being BedoiunA(not B). Again no Great Lake Africans were included.
You know sometimes I wonder about you AstenB. I am not sure if it is too much weed or too much ego. Give it up! Stop riding my dick. You are no match.
As I said. Great Lake Africans weren't compared to the Abusir mummies.
@Lioness. I haven't read that article as yet. There may be some trickery in there just as I am pointing out to AstenB now about the Abusir. I know their game.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
To be clear. There has to be an unsupervised(or about 800,000SNP-supervised) Cluster Chart from K2 - K8 which includes a logical/sensible group of populations that surround Abusir like Great Lakes Africans, Horners and Berbers and Near East population. This was not done. And the few PRE-SELECTED populations that were included show that the Abusir are closest to the Bedouins and NOT Europeans and most Near Easterners like Turkish Syrians, Saudi', Ashkenazi etc. The two closest population in the data they provided are the heavily Africanized Bedouins and Yemenis...and Tunisians. Look at the fugking charts .....Dick!
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I haven't read the paper Lioness but without reading it I can pick out the game. ------- Quote: "The Natufian sample consisted of 61.2% Arabian, 21.2% Northern African, 10.9% Western 12 Asian, and 6.8% Omotic ancestry (Figure 1F and Table 1)." -- North AFRICAN=21.2% Omotic (African)=6.8% Arabian ??? (Bedouin??? - not Turks)=61.2%
Not related to West Asian(Europeans), not related to the Turks in the Levant, Makes sense to me. What is the problem? Up the Nile and into Arabia over thousands of years. Remnants still exist in SSA East Africa today(Omotic)
I will read some-time later. But I don't need to read it. I can now PREDICT their spin and lies.
Did they use the label/word 61% "Arabian"? I will bet the "Arabians' are the Bedouins". Am I right?
DNATribes used the label Saharo-Arabians. Remember? Distinct from West Asians(Turks). Henn Also. Pay me a dollar$!
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: @AstenB You know you never fail to surprise me ...WTF are you talking about . Sup Fig4 do NOT have a comparison of Abusir with Great Lakes Africans. WT.... The bottom chart includes the Abusir against "some' Near East populations looks like @K4. WTF. Great Lake Africans are NOT included but one Horner group was included...Somali. Of the few populations included @K4 the BedoiunB are closest to the Abusir in that chart.
You do see in the Supplementary Figure 4 it says : "Complete results from the ADMIXTURE analysis using ALL samples in the merged data set". You see that right?
You do notice that its NOT just K=4 because other than the Main 4 : Anatolia N (Dark Blue)/Iran N (Light Blue)/ Natufian (Brown)/ Yoruba (Red) Iran Neolithic has the additional Pink, Purple and Olive components....There is also that Green component at low levels in the Maghreb. You see that right?
You do understand how ADMIXTURE works right?
You can actually READ right....so in when it gets to a part of the study:
quote: Nuclear data analysis: ADMIXTURE We used the ADMIXTURE software on the merged data set to cluster ancestry proportions using different numbers of clusters37. The lowest cross-validation error was obtained using K=16 and we show the results of that run in Supplementary Fig. 4. A subset is shown in Fig. 4b.
You understand what a SUBSET is right? And WHY they removed all the Amerindians, East Asians, Pacific islanders, Europeans and Sub Saharans from the graphic..... Come on gramps...SMH. I admit when i fvck up......Im thinking damn maybe i messed up. So i checked the text. Now I see that I didnt fvck up...you messed up. Go ahead, go back and read the text and you should have an even BETTER analysis to give the forum.. I promise you will have something even better to say.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
"So i checked the text". Fool the "text" do NOT match the data charts. God damn it! what is wrong with you black people? Europeans constantly screw with you.....
What are you...a moron? Look at the top chart on Supp Fig 4
Plus the author mixed-up BedouinB vs BedouinA in some charts. Either give up the weed or ego. I told you already I am out of your league. This is not a pissing contest
Young man. The first lesson you need to learn is .."Europeans lie"... most of them. What they report/tell you and what the data shows is most time unmatched. Or they will skew the charts. That's what they do!!!! That’s what they are doing in the top chart of pg3 Supp. It do NOT match the bottom chart of the page where they show K4. Understand how they skew the data and the games they play. Do not believe the "text" look at the data with independent eyes. Like what others are finally doing 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 |
posted
To the newbies who don't get it. What the authors have done is chose a population in the Near East and gave them the label "Eurasian', based upon Geographic location. But what some fools don't know is the Bedouins are the indigenous population of Arabia/Near East/Levant. These very Bedouins are essentially Africans. That is why Lazaridis used the quote...he cannot disentangle EEF from YRI and thus used Bedouins as a proxy for Basal Eurasian. The Bedouins are Africans genetically....who lives in Arabia. I knew that over 7 years ago. See ESR. That is why the Bedouins are closest to Abusir and Neolithic Levant. They stacked the deck by labelling Bedouins as Eurasians creating the perception that Abusir are not African. All Cluster Charts show Bedoiuns are Africans...albeit North Africans. They carry E1b1b, E1b1a and R-V88. Do your fugking research.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: SMH. AstenB! AstenB! AstenB!
What are you...a moron? Look at the top chart on Supp Fig 4
It do NOT match the bottom chart of the page where they show K4. Understand how they skew the data and the games they play.
Notice and Count the components in your K=4 RED - yoruba Dark Blue - Anatolia Aqua Blue - Iran Brown - Natufian Lime Green - Maghreb Pink - Iran Purple - Iran Olive - Iran
Where do those other colors come from if its only K=4.
You figure out whats going on yet?
quote: K=16 and we show the results of that run in Supplementary Fig. 4. A subset is shown in Fig. 4b.
The FULL K=16 is in the Supp. The SUBSET is what they show you in the main article. Catch up gramps
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mansamusa: I think xxyyman and Clyde Winters are about to have an epileptic feat:
"Supervised clustering or projection analysis is a staple technique in population genetic analysis. The utility of this technique depends critically on the reference panel. The most commonly used reference panel in the analysis of ancient DNA to date is based on the Human Origins array. We previously described a larger reference panel that captures more ancestries on the global level. Here, I reanalyzed DNA data from 279 ancient Eurasians using our reference panel, finding substantially more ancestral heterogeneity than has been reported. This reanalysis provides evidence against a resurgence of Western hunter-gatherer ancestry in the Middle to Late Neolithic and evidence for a common ancestor of farmers characterized by Western Asian ancestry, a transition of the spread of agriculture from demic to cultural diffusion, at least two migrations between the Pontic-Caspian steppes and Bronze Age Europe, and a sub-Saharan African component in Natufians that localizes to present-day southern Ethiopia " Negroid Natufians
.
.
quote: The Natufian sample consisted of 61.2% Arabian, 21.2% Northern African, 10.9% Western 12 Asian, and 6.8% Omotic ancestry (Figure 1F and Table 1).
this = "Negroid" ^ , one drop rule
What on earth are you trying to say lady/man/robot/agent/whatever you are?
Posts: 288 | From: Asia | Registered: Mar 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
Elmaestro said the article, that quote there is repping 29% African for that Natufians. You said "Negroid Natufians" That means that 29%, a little less than 1/3 = "Negroid" That is like the one drop rule, that a percentage under 50% still = "Negroid"
Posts: 42925 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Davidski's response in the comments section
quote:Hello author,
Unfortunately, there are some major problems with your paper.
For one, you're basing your conclusions about the ancient samples on ADMIXTURE clusters derived from modern-day samples, and thus getting many things backwards.
Have you thought about using ADMIXTOOLS to try and back up your conclusions with formal statistics and models based on formal statistics?
Also, some of your inferences are based on an incomplete knowledge of the current ancient DNA record. For instance, you claim that Northern European R1a derives from the steppe north and east of the Caspian Sea, and that Southern European R1b derives from the steppe north of the Black Sea.
Please note that the oldest recorded instance of R1a-M417, which encompasses more than 90% of modern-day R1a lineages in Europe and Asia, is on the steppe north of the Black Sea: sample Ukraine_Eneolithic ID I6561 from Mathieson et al. 2018.
And the oldest recorded instance of R1b-M269, which encompasses more than 90% of modern-day R1b lineages in the world, is on the steppe north of the Caspian Sea: sample Yamnaya_Samara ID I0429 from Haak et al. 2015.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Elmaestro said the article, that quote there is repping 29% African for that Natufians. You said "Negroid Natufians" That means that 29%, a little less than 1/3 = "Negroid" That is like the one drop rule, that a percentage under 50% still = "Negroid"
OK.
Posts: 288 | From: Asia | Registered: Mar 2016
| IP: Logged |
As I said it is impossible for the Abusir to be anything but sub-saharan African from the Great Lakes since the Great Lakes Africans carry some ancestral clades found in the Abusir mummies. It took me a while to track down what they did and how they presented the data. In addition @K16 do not include Abusir and the K4 chart do include Great Lakes African. Hit me up if you have any questions. Supp Fig 3(not Fig 4) did not include Sub-Saharan Africans from Great Lakes which is what I was looking at but when I dug deeper I realize the game they played. In addition BedouinA and BedouinB is reversed in relation to Abusir between Cluster Charts and PCA. Futhermore “Red” is a Yoruba component. They are equating YRI as SSA which is misleading. They need to identify a “Great Lake” SNP/Component and then come to that conclusion of less SSA in Abusir. So it still stands they did not do a comparison between Great Lakes Africans and Abusir. “Red” is not Great Lakes as an African you should know that. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE ABUSIR TO BE ANYTHING BUT AFRICAN!!! That still stands. Geography don’t lie!
--------------- Further….. Quote: Fu et al Tianyuan Cave, “Nuclear DNA Capture. Nonrepetitive regions of chromosome 21, as well as polymorphic positions across the genome selected to detect archaic human admixture, were captured using single-stranded biotinylated capture probes prepared from a commercial array (SI Text, section 3.2). Libraries were reamplified and captures were performed twice (SI Text, section3.1). The Sequence Read Archive accession number of chromosome 21 as well as polymorphic position sequences is ERP002037.”
Fu et al Abusir “Nuclear DNA capture. The non-UDG and UDG treated libraries were enriched by hybridization to probes targeting approximately 1.24 million genomic SNPs as described previously25. The target SNPs consist of panels 1 and 2 as described in Mathieson et al.41 and Fu et al.26 (see Supplementary Note 2 for details).”
--------------
Hit me up if you have any questions.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Let Capra or anyone who understands this is explain to you why this is a 'supervised' Cluster Chart. Hint's are in the above....
I knew I was 110% correct. I know geography don't lie. I needed to dig deeper to see their angle. Where they were lying.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
To lurkers. To clarify. Red=Yoruba. Yes. But We are NOT comparing West Africans with Abusir. Abusir needs to be compared with Great Lake Africans. BTW this was done in. Title : Northeast African genomic variation shaped by the continuity of indigenous groups and Eurasian migrations - Nina Hollfelder, Published: August 24, 2017
Is this a rebuttal to Abusir paper? Lol! It disputes Abusir?
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am done with you AstenB. You don't know what you are talking about. Re-read my previous post. Hope you understand. Anything NEW to add I will answer. Again YRI are not GReat Lakes Africans...fool!
********
Ok. I started reading the paper. OP.
First off…
Abstract Supervised clustering or projection analysis is a staple technique in population genetic analysis. The utility of this technique depends critically on the reference panel. The most commonly used reference panel in the analysis of ancient DNA to date is based on the Human Origins array. We previously described a larger reference panel that captures more ancestries on the global level. Here, I reanalyzed DNA data from 279 ancient Eurasians using our reference panel, finding substantially more ancestral heterogeneity than has been reported. This reanalysis provides evidence against a resurgence of Western hunter-gatherer ancestry in the Middle to Late Neolithic and evidence for a common ancestor of farmers characterized by Western Asian ancestry, a transition of the spread of agriculture from demic to cultural diffusion, at least two migrations between the Pontic-Caspian steppes and Bronze Age Europe, and a sub-Saharan African component in Natufians that localizes to present-day southern Ethiopia.
----
What are they telling us? 1. They went back an reanalyzed old dataset beacuse in the past other lying reserachers used skewed data manipulation called "supervised" testing. 2. After reanalysis they(current testers) found sub-saharan DNA in Natufians. This is not a surprise to me. I told you so. I know their game 3. They have been fugking with the data all along. I told you so 4. Two problems – Who are West Asians? Key word here is “characterized”. Trickery??! 5. There was no migration from the Steppes because Steppe ancestry appeared in Iberia/Ireland BEFORE there were Yamnyan Pastoralist. It is impossible for there to be migratyion from the East to West Europe. But that is another story. Let us begin the breakdown of 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 |
posted
I told you I am out of your league. I am above your pay grade. I admit you threw for a loop for a minute there. The old red-herring strawman tactic used by Euronuts. Comparing YRI with Abusir. SMH. But fortunately the analysis was done already
Northeast African genomic variation shaped by the continuity of indigenous groups and Eurasian migrations - Nina Hollfelder, Published: August 24, 2017
Is this a rebuttal to Abusir paper? Lol! It disputes Abusir?
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: @XYYMAN - Go ahead and post an image of the K=4. You know....
For Capra….I know there game. It is called data manipulation and trickery. Is this author exposing the lies. Daniel Shriner. Of course he isn’t. Admit lies and replace it more lies. What did Kdolo call it? Quote: “Having learned ancestry-specific allele frequencies in unsupervised clustering analysis from a data set, it is computationally efficient to project new samples onto the ancestries in order to learn about population structure in the new samples. The utility and quality of projection analysis, or supervised clustering analysis, strongly depends on the reference set of learned ancestries.”
"Wow! Quote: “Furthermore, none of the results in the ancient DNA papers has been replicated using a second reference panel. Here, we combined completely public domain data to generate a reference panel comprising 5,966 individuals from 282 samples, from which we estimated 21 ancestries7. After projecting 279 ancient Eurasians onto our reference panel, we reached a distinct series of conclusions regarding the genetic history of Europe and Western Asia.”
"The transition in the Levant from the pipaleolithic to the Neolithic period involved an INCREASE of Arabian ancestry at the EXPENSE of Northern African and Omotic ancestries. The
"
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
After reading this entire study plus the Supps. A few things.
Notice that Iberia and Greece has a higher fraction of West African ancestry(6000bc) which faded out during the subsequent years. There is They admit that R1b probably came from the “south” not from the Steppes. Also admitted that Natufians carried more SSA ancestray which also faded. During the late Bronze age. Now if the Early Greeks had West African Ancestry and the Natufians had SSA ancestry what about the Abusir who lived in Africa? Such a C…
Oh! And they critiqued “supervised” testing and did the same themselves. SMH
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
@Xyyman. I asked you for something VERY simple. To post and image of what you are saying is K=4. Very simple task. Post it and I will admit that I fvkced up.
Its time to put up or shut up. I have already posted my image and quotes from the publication. As of now you are just running at the mouth.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
As I said. Repeat, Great Lakes Africans weren't compared to the Abusir. They are comparing YRI with Abusir ...and using supervised(ie skewed AIM at that).
The subsequent rebuttal confirms that.
Don't you get that? And I did not need to analyzed the study because it is geographically impossible for the Abusirs to be anything but African. It is just a matter of trying to figure out where they are lying and twisting the data. There you have it. They used the distant West African YRI(Red) to make the comparison and draw their conclusion and still needed to “doctor” the test by limiting the SNP analysis to skew the results. Are you too dumb to understand that?
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: [Q] @AstenB You know you never fail to surprise me ...WTF are you talking about . Sup Fig4 do NOT have a comparison of Abusir with Great Lakes Africans. WT.... The bottom chart includes the Abusir against "some' Near East populations looks like @K4. WTF. Great Lake Africans are NOT included but one Horner group was included...Somali. Of the few populations included @K4 the BedoiunB are closest to the Abusir in that chart.
In addition to that Fig 4 in the main article has the closest match to Abusir being BedoiunA(not B). Again no Great Lake Africans were included.
You know sometimes I wonder about you AstenB. I am not sure if it is too much weed or too much ego. Give it up! Stop riding my dick. You are no match.
As I said. Great Lake Africans weren't compared to the Abusir mummies.
@Lioness. I haven't read that article as yet. There may be some trickery in there just as I am pointing out to AstenB now about the Abusir. I know their game. [/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 |
posted
You see whats going on here. I am asking you to POST AN IMAGE of what you claim is K=4. You are not posting it. You are posting repetitive text. Why is that? Just go ahead and post and image homeboy.
XYYMan posting image + Proving Beyoku wrong = Greatness. Be great...dont be stupid.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: @AstenB The bottom chart includes the Abusir against "some' Near East populations looks like @K4. WTF. Great Lake Africans are NOT included but one Horner group was included...Somali. .
You say at "K=4" they "include the Somali". If there are only 4 components (K=4) what is the Teal Blue component in the Somali? I am sure you have this all figured out "Tic Toc".
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
It is geographically impossible for the Abusir to anything but African. I said "looks like K4. But the key is Red=YRI not Great Lakes plus the AIM are "selective" They are not comparing Abusir with Great Lakes Africans don't you get that? Notice Sandawe carry less than 50% red even with their skewed AIM
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: [Q] @AstenB.
man you are a ditz...
As I said it is impossible for the Abusir to be anything but sub-saharan African from the Great Lakes since the Great Lakes Africans carry some ancestral clades found in the Abusir mummies. It took me a while to track down what they did and how they presented the data. In addition @K16 do not include Abusir and the K4 chart do include Great Lakes African. Hit me up if you have any questions. Supp Fig 3(not Fig 4) did not include Sub-Saharan Africans from Great Lakes which is what I was looking at but when I dug deeper I realize the game they played. In addition BedouinA and BedouinB is reversed in relation to Abusir between Cluster Charts and PCA. Futhermore “Red” is a Yoruba component. They are equating YRI as SSA which is misleading. They need to identify a “Great Lake” SNP/Component and then come to that conclusion of less SSA in Abusir. So it still stands they did not do a comparison between Great Lakes Africans and Abusir. “Red” is not Great Lakes as an African you should know that. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE ABUSIR TO BE ANYTHING BUT AFRICAN!!! That still stands. Geography don’t lie!
--------------- Further….. Quote: Fu et al Tianyuan Cave, “Nuclear DNA Capture. Nonrepetitive regions of chromosome 21, as well as polymorphic positions across the genome selected to detect archaic human admixture, were captured using single-stranded biotinylated capture probes prepared from a commercial array (SI Text, section 3.2). Libraries were reamplified and captures were performed twice (SI Text, section3.1). The Sequence Read Archive accession number of chromosome 21 as well as polymorphic position sequences is ERP002037.”
Fu et al Abusir “Nuclear DNA capture. The non-UDG and UDG treated libraries were enriched by hybridization to probes targeting approximately 1.24 million genomic SNPs as described previously25. The target SNPs consist of panels 1 and 2 as described in Mathieson et al.41 and Fu et al.26 (see Supplementary Note 2 for details).”
--------------
Hit me up if you have any questions. [/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 |
posted
What is the teal blue component in Somali? You say it “Looks Like K=4”. I don’t care what you think it looks like. If there is nobody on ES that can intervene and assist XYY this site is doomed.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: [QB] Grasping at straws now.... SMH
As I said. Repeat, Great Lakes Africans
you are using a DNA Tribes genetic category term but if you are to should be using terms from a peer reviewed journal sources on the same topic
Posts: 42925 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ancient Egyptian mummy genomes suggest an increase of ****Yoruban **** ancestry in post-Roman periods - Verena J. Schuenemann
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Ancient Egyptian mummy genomes suggest an increase of ****Yoruban **** ancestry in post-Roman periods - Verena J. Schuenemann
Name the haplogroups that are Great Lakes but not overlapping, not common to West African Yoruba
Posts: 42925 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
What is this brown component found in highest Frequency in Abusir, Natufians, Sandawe, all north Africans including Canary Islanders, Onge?, Ethiopians Jews, Yemenis etc but trace amounts in Southern "Europeans" and absent in Basque and Northern Europeans. Highest freuency of brown is found in? Brown = North 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 |
posted
Brown is obvious a southern Mediterranean component ie African component. It is the highest component in the Abusir. It is old because it is found in Khoi-San and Makrani and Onge
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: [QB] What is this brown component found in highest Frequency in Abusir, Natufians, Sandawe, all north Africans including Canary Islanders, Onge?, Ethiopians Jews, Yemenis etc but trace amounts in Southern "Europeans" and absent in Basque and Northern Europeans. Highest freuency of brown is found in? Brown = North African?
Name the haplogroups that are Great Lakes but not overlapping with, not common to West African Yoruba
Posts: 42925 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic