posted
Somalis and Ethiopians are quite dark, about the same complexion as West and Central Africans on average, yet some really believe they are close to 50% "Eurasian." What this tells me is that unless those so called "Eurasians" thats supposedly migrated into the Horn and mixed with them were also just as dark, we must call into question the true quantity of "Eurasian" they really are
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
thats what seems to be the difference, If the eurasians are that rich inside color that would mean the mixture is Black on Black also would the eurasian not of affected the country by people looking Arabian, yet we do not see this
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elijah The Tishbite: Somalis and Ethiopians are quite dark, about the same complexion as West and Central Africans on average, yet some really believe they are close to 50% "Eurasian."
50% is too high, do you have quote of someone claiming that that is not an anonymous person in some forum?
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
As a person who has actually been to the Horn(Ethiopia) and East Africa(Kenya/Tanzania), and has Ethiopians in my family some notes...
1. Skin tones alone does not tell us anything about one's admixture. East Indians are extremely dark and yet are genetically distant from Africans.
2. Among Horners there are different skin variations. Some like the Tigreys who I have met in person are VERY LIGHT. Not all Horn of Africans are as dark as "West Africans." And heck different West-Central Africans have skin variations and aren't all the same. But as for Horners at least the Cushitic ones, the average skin tone I constantly see among them is a "bronze" like skin tone. Again this coming from experience.
3. Who has argued that the average Horner is 50% Eurasian??? Horn of Africans have differing levels of Eurasian admixture. Heck I never even seen the most Hamitic supremacist Somali argue they are 50% Eurasian, maybe 40-30%.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Askia_The_Great: As a person who has actually been to the Horn(Ethiopia) and East Africa(Kenya/Tanzania), and has Ethiopians in my family some notes...
1. Skin tones alone does not tell us anything about one's admixture. East Indians are extremely dark and yet are genetically distant from Africans.
2. Among Horners there are different skin variations. Some like the Tigreys who I have met in person are VERY LIGHT. Not all Horn of Africans are as dark as "West Africans." And heck different West-Central Africans have skin variations and aren't all the same. But as for Horners at least the Cushitic ones, the average skin tone I constantly see among them is a "bronze" like skin tone. Again this coming from experience.
3. Who has argued that the average Horner is 50% Eurasian??? Horn of Africans have differing levels of Eurasian admixture. Heck I never even seen the most Hamitic supremacist Somali argue they are 50% Eurasian, maybe 40-30%.
I never said they were all one skin tone, I said that on average they are dark people, though not as dark as Dinka and Nuer who are the darkest Africans. I once was stationed at Camp Lemmonier in Djibouti for a year as a contractor, and although there some light people the majority were dark as in medium brown to a deep brown.
As for admixture I can't see them being nor more than 30% admixed. These admmixture sofwares can't differentiate between recent common shared ancestry via OOA and "Eurasian" mixture
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
As for admixture I can't see them being nor more than 30% admixed. These admmixture sofwares can't differentiate between recent common shared ancestry via OOA and "Eurasian" mixture
Some of this around that percentage on the YDNA but it can be differentiated
The maternal ancestry of Ethiopians is similarly diverse. About half (52.2%) of Ethiopians belongs to mtdna Haplogroups L0, L1, L2, L3, L4, L5, or L6. These haplogroups are generally confined to the African continent. They also originated either in Ethiopia or very near. The other portion of the population belong to Haplogroup N (31%) and Haplogroup M1 (17%)
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ That percentage is FALSE and comes from a distortion of an autosomal study done by Dr. Sarah Tishkoff et al. (2004). In that study it was found that the Amhara, the dominant ethnic group in Ethiopia, has 40% Eurasian admixture. The Euronuts then spun it to mean that all Ethiopians are 40% Eurasian, then they spun it further to say that all Horn Africans are 40% Eurasian. Some have even increased the number to 50% and some even 60%! LOL
Moral of the story: properly cite studies and stop going by what some idiot says.
The highest percentage of admixture in the Horn (I forgot the number) is unsurprisingly found in Eritrea, a coastal nation by the Red Sea, and the ethnic group having it is the Tigray of that country.
Another issue is the ridiculous belief that alleged Eurasian admixture can be seen in phenotypic features like lighter skin color, narrow facial features (so-called "caucasoid"), and loose hair form. But as Elijah shows the vast majority of Horn Africans are no different in complexion from West Africans.
As the late Dr. C. Loring Brace stated: An earlier generation of anthropologists tried to explain face form in the Horn of Africa as the result of admixture from hypothetical “wandering Caucasoids,” (Adams, 1967, 1979; MacGaffey, 1966; Seligman, 1913, 1915, 19341, but that explanation founders on the paradox of why that supposedly potent “Caucasoid” people contributed a dominant quantity of genes for nose and face form but none for skin color or limb proportions.
So Horn Africans are not only black-skinned but they have the same tropical adapted limb proportions as other Sub-Saharans. The only difference is their facial features and hair form. As for the latter, it was already discussed here that loose hair form in the Horn is most common in the south away from the northern coasts where most Eurasian admixture occurs along with thick curly to kinky hair! We even discussed a study here showing how East African genes for narrow facial features have NOTHING to do with Eurasians.
Plus, the idea that "Eurasian" = "caucasoid" is also silly considering how you have indigenous populations in across the Red Sea who look like this:
This shouldn't be surprising since Arabia lies along the same latitude as Sudan. The lighter-skinned, hairy suit, 'Arab' types people see in popular media originate from further north in historical times and even Biblical and Assyrian texts agree that the original inhabitants of Arabia were black.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: [QB] ^ That percentage is FALSE and comes from a distortion of an autosomal study done by Dr. Sarah Tishkoff et al. (2004). In that study it was found that the Amhara, the dominant ethnic group in Ethiopia, has 40% Eurasian admixture. The Euronuts then spun it to mean that all Ethiopians are 40% Eurasian, then they spun it further to say that all Horn Africans are 40% Eurasian. Some have even increased the number to 50% and some even 60%! LOL
Show us a quote of these "Euronuts" saying Horn Africans are 40% Eurasian and some increasing the number to 50% and some even 60%!
So far Elijah The Tishbite has not shown any.
We're supposed to get mad about stuff said but nobody knows where it was saying this?
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: That percentage is FALSE and comes from a distortion of an autosomal study done by Dr. Sarah Tishkoff et al. (2004). In that study it was found that the Amhara, the dominant ethnic group in Ethiopia, has 40% Eurasian admixture. The Euronuts then spun it to mean that all Ethiopians are 40% Eurasian, then they spun it further to say that all Horn Africans are 40% Eurasian.
How much of that ancestry is actually Eurasian to begin with? I do expect Ethio-Semitic speakers to have some Arabian ancestry, since South Semitic seems to have come to the Horn from Arabia (an example of a linguistic back-migration if there ever was one, since Semitic itself originally descends from a migration of Proto-Afroasiatic into Asia). However, I doubt this research could distinguish between genuine Eurasian ancestry and pre-OOA African ancestry back in 2004. It seems probable to me that they over-estimated the amount of Eurasian in Amhara based on the overly simplistic SSA/Eurasian binary paradigm.
posted
As usual and expected Djehuti is either intentionally providing false information to members here or revealing his lack of knowledge, as he has not kept up with DNA research papers published after 2005.
Here the amount of west eurasian ancestry in the Horn according to Pickrell et al. 2014 and we see that the main groups in the Horn are above 40% except Somalis :
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hence in conclusion we argue that the X-chromosome evidence presented here shows a genetic continuity ranging from Sub-Saharan Africa, through North-Eastern Africa, into the Near East. However, the reduction in Tn diversity does suggest that a population bottleneck occurred in Ethiopia, associated with a major out of Africa expansion(s), which parallels the conclusion made by Tishkoff et al. (1996) from analysis of the CD4 locus. Certainly our data are not incompatible with the argument from Tishkoff et al. (1996) that an element of the contempo-rary Ethiopian population may be descendants of the ancestral population that spawned the migration out of Africa. We also argue, however, that in addition to this early bottleneck event, later periods of admixture have played a major role in shaping the gene pool of Ethiopia, and its populations display both Eurasian and Sub-Saharan genetic influences. While these results are from the analysis of just one locus, and samples sizes for a number of populations remain relatively small (particularly in the case of the Oromo and the Ethiopian Jews), we feel that in association with data from other marker systems they add a complemen-tary perspective to the history of Ethiopia and her peoples.
Ethiopia: between Sub-Saharan Africa and Western Eurasia
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Show us a quote of these "Euronuts" saying Horn Africans are 40% Eurasian and some increasing the number to 50% and some even 60%!
So far Elijah The Tishbite has not shown any.
We're supposed to get mad about stuff said but nobody knows where it was saying this?
Elijah and I are not crazy, because we have seen Euronut trolls making the claims for years but ever since the Mota genome error it became worse. We didn't make the claim up. There were trolls who started entire threads on the topic but I'm not able to find them, probably because they were deleted. But if you want to find the threads where the claims is made be my guest.
By the way, Elijah and I are not citing the claim to make anyone "mad" unless that is what you are feeling right now? Why is that?
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP: How much of that ancestry is actually Eurasian to begin with? I do expect Ethio-Semitic speakers to have some Arabian ancestry, since South Semitic seems to have come to the Horn from Arabia (an example of a linguistic back-migration if there ever was one, since Semitic itself originally descends from a migration of Proto-Afroasiatic into Asia). However, I doubt this research could distinguish between genuine Eurasian ancestry and pre-OOA African ancestry back in 2004. It seems probable to me that they over-estimated the amount of Eurasian in Amhara based on the overly simplistic SSA/Eurasian binary paradigm.
There are Eurasian lineages namely J1 whose presence in the Horn go back to Neolithic times, but there are more recent admixture events that date to the Bronze Age and even Middle Ages, so there were multiple waves of migration. It's similar to Egypt, having multiple waves of immigration.
But recall your thread on a study that calls into question what components are actually Eurasian.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Antalas: As usual and expected Djehuti is either intentionally providing false information to members here or revealing his lack of knowledge, as he has not kept up with DNA research papers published after 2005.
And pray tell what false information have I provided?? You are the one who has constantly been either providing false information OR distorting what the data says. Even your arguments are inconsistent, with you claiming that Nubians are black in some threads and then not black in others! LOL You are a typical North African suffering from identity crisis and your distorted identity is projected on to other Africans who have nothing to do with you!
quote:Here the amount of West Eurasian ancestry in the Horn according to Pickrell et al. 2014 and we see that the main groups in the Horn are above 40% except Somalis :
First of all, what I cited was the older Tishkoff study not Pickrell! Second, the main groups in the Horn are the Oromo and Somali! Amhara are 2nd main group in Ethiopia, while Oromo are the majority. Somali are the 3rd largest in Ethiopia in the Ogaden provence but then you have Somalia proper. The Tigray who have the highest Eurasian admixture are found in Eritrea. Which proves my point that Eurasian ancestry increases the closer you are to the Red Sea coast! So where am I wrong??
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: The highest percentage of admixture in the Horn (I forgot the number) is unsurprisingly found in Eritrea, a coastal nation by the Red Sea, and the ethnic group having it is the Tigray of that country.
According to the chart you posted I was correct. But of course the mind that's twisted, twists all.
By the way as I noted to Brandon, there is still a debate as to exactly how how much of this "Eurasian" ancestry is truly Eurasian. As an example, the initial Mota genome study had a significant error exaggerating the Eurasian influence going as far as to say that Southern African Khoisan are predominantly Eurasian, but even YOU kept citing that mistake.
So who is really lying here?
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: As an example, the initial Mota genome study had a significant error exaggerating the Eurasian influence going as far as to say that Southern African Khoisan are predominantly Eurasian, but even YOU kept citing that mistake.
quote:Originally posted by Antalas: As usual and expected Djehuti is either intentionally providing false information to members here or revealing his lack of knowledge, as he has not kept up with DNA research papers published after 2005.
Here the amount of west eurasian ancestry in the Horn according to Pickrell et al. 2014 and we see that the main groups in the Horn are above 40% except Somalis :
This study is from 2014 as well and none of the Horners approach 40% Eurasian:
Afar 10.5% Arabian Ethiopia Jews 13.6 Arabian Ethiopian Amhara 14.7 Arabian Ethiopian Oromo 5.1 Arabian Ethiopian Somali 0% Arabian Ethiopian Tigray 16.3 Arabian/Levantine Caucasian 6.1% Oromo 10.3% Arabian Tygray 14.4% Arabian Wolayta 6.1% Arabian
Also from the study:
The Amhara, Oromo and Wolayta samples from Ethiopia had Lowland East Cushitic, Nilo-Saharan, Omotic and Arabian ancestry and the Tygray sample also had a small amount of Levantine-Caucasian ancestry (Supplementary Table 1). These samples of Ethiopians had no Niger-Congo or European ancestry (Supplementary Table 1). These results indicate that the YRI and CEU samples are not optimal choices as proxies for the parental populations of Ethiopians. Furthermore, these Ethiopian samples have four or five ancestries and therefore should not be modeled by two-way admixture. As with the Mozabite sample, use of the YRI and CEU samples as proxies for the parental populations for the Ethiopians will lead to reconstruction of excessively short haplotypes, estimation of excessively long times since admixture began and poor estimates of admixture proportions.Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: And pray tell what false information have I provided?? You are the one who has constantly been either providing false information OR distorting what the data says. Even your arguments are inconsistent, with you claiming that Nubians are black in some threads and then not black in others! LOL You are a typical North African suffering from identity crisis and your distorted identity is projected on to other Africans who have nothing to do with you!
Here are your lies :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: That percentage is FALSE and comes from a distortion of an autosomal study done by Dr. Sarah Tishkoff et al. (2004). In that study it was found that the Amhara, the dominant ethnic group in Ethiopia, has 40% Eurasian admixture. The Euronuts then spun it to mean that all Ethiopians are 40% Eurasian, then they spun it further to say that all Horn Africans are 40% Eurasian. Some have even increased the number to 50% and some even 60%!
Saying that it comes from Tishkoff et al. 2004, saying that Amhara are only 40% while they are at almost 50%, implying that 40% is the upper limit and saying that 50% or 60% can't be reached.
I have not been inconsistent in any way, as I never suggested or clearly stated that Nubians constituted a homogeneous ethnic group. Therefore, it is true that lower Nubians were not black, while southern "Nubians" were (this situation persists today).
Meanwhile you said "black" is only a "color descriptor" yet talked about "black ancestry and features" (I already took a screenshot of your answer so it's useless to edit it).
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: First of all, what I cited was the older Tishkoff study not Pickrell! Second, the main groups in the Horn are the Oromo and Somali! Amhara are 2nd main group in Ethiopia, while Oromo are the majority. Somali are the 3rd largest in Ethiopia in the Ogaden provence but then you have Somalia proper. The Tigray who have the highest Eurasian admixture are found in Eritrea. Which proves my point that Eurasian ancestry increases the closer you are to the Red Sea coast! So where am I wrong??
Look how you try to save yourself now XD From "Amhara, the dominant ethnic group has 40% eurasian admixture" to "Somalis in Ogaden" XD
Even Somalis can score more than 40% here some example :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: According to the chart you posted I was correct. But of course the mind that's twisted, twists all.
By the way as I noted to Brandon, there is still a debate as to exactly how how much of this "Eurasian" ancestry is truly Eurasian. As an example, the initial Mota genome study had a significant error exaggerating the Eurasian influence going as far as to say that Southern African Khoisan are predominantly Eurasian, but even YOU kept citing that mistake.
So who is really lying here?
You aren't correct at all since most people in the Horn have more than 40% eurasian admixture. You were also wrong when you stated that no horner plot closer to europeans than west africans.
And it doesn't matter how much you desperately try to make this eurasian component a local one. The component can be 100% african with zero south arabian introgression and even in that case, most Sub-Saharan African populations would still lack it, and the component would still share more genetic similarities with a true Eurasian component.
It's over drop the case. Morphologically they plot with eurasians (including europeans), genetically they are much closer to eurasians (including light skinned north africans like me) and they have substantial eurasian ancestry.
The Nubian Kadruka/Kulubnarti samples had also the same amount of eurasian ancestry if not more in the case of Kulubnarti so let's not even start with ancient egyptians further north.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
Afar 10.5% Arabian Ethiopia Jews 13.6 Arabian Ethiopian Amhara 14.7 Arabian Ethiopian Oromo 5.1 Arabian Ethiopian Somali 0% Arabian Ethiopian Tigray 16.3 Arabian/Levantine Caucasian 6.1% Oromo 10.3% Arabian Tygray 14.4% Arabian Wolayta 6.1% Arabian
Also from the study:
The Amhara, Oromo and Wolayta samples from Ethiopia had Lowland East Cushitic, Nilo-Saharan, Omotic and Arabian ancestry and the Tygray sample also had a small amount of Levantine-Caucasian ancestry (Supplementary Table 1). These samples of Ethiopians had no Niger-Congo or European ancestry (Supplementary Table 1). These results indicate that the YRI and CEU samples are not optimal choices as proxies for the parental populations of Ethiopians. Furthermore, these Ethiopian samples have four or five ancestries and therefore should not be modeled by two-way admixture. As with the Mozabite sample, use of the YRI and CEU samples as proxies for the parental populations for the Ethiopians will lead to reconstruction of excessively short haplotypes, estimation of excessively long times since admixture began and poor estimates of admixture proportions. [/QB]
You just contradicted yourself : Why are you simplifying West Eurasian ancestry as merely "Arabian"? Even the quote you referenced acknowledges that multiple proxies are necessary to accurately model them. Seems like you are not even aware of the fact that multiple waves of Eurasian migration occurred at different periods in the Horn of Africa.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
Afar 10.5% Arabian Ethiopia Jews 13.6 Arabian Ethiopian Amhara 14.7 Arabian Ethiopian Oromo 5.1 Arabian Ethiopian Somali 0% Arabian Ethiopian Tigray 16.3 Arabian/Levantine Caucasian 6.1% Oromo 10.3% Arabian Tygray 14.4% Arabian Wolayta 6.1% Arabian
Also from the study:
The Amhara, Oromo and Wolayta samples from Ethiopia had Lowland East Cushitic, Nilo-Saharan, Omotic and Arabian ancestry and the Tygray sample also had a small amount of Levantine-Caucasian ancestry (Supplementary Table 1). These samples of Ethiopians had no Niger-Congo or European ancestry (Supplementary Table 1). These results indicate that the YRI and CEU samples are not optimal choices as proxies for the parental populations of Ethiopians. Furthermore, these Ethiopian samples have four or five ancestries and therefore should not be modeled by two-way admixture. As with the Mozabite sample, use of the YRI and CEU samples as proxies for the parental populations for the Ethiopians will lead to reconstruction of excessively short haplotypes, estimation of excessively long times since admixture began and poor estimates of admixture proportions. [/QB]
You just contradicted yourself : Why are you simplifying West Eurasian ancestry as merely "Arabian"? Even the quote you referenced acknowledges that multiple proxies are necessary to accurately model them. Seems like you are not even aware of the fact that multiple waves of Eurasian migration occurred at different periods in the Horn of Africa. [/QB]
I guess you can't read, the 4 or 5 ancestries that Ethiopians and Somalis have according to THAT study in 2014 are Lowland eastern Cushitic, Nilo-Saharan, Omotic, Arabian, and in the case of the Tigray only, Levantine Caucasian. That 30-50% Eurasian figure is way overstated and what "multiple waves" of Eurasians migrated into the Horn? There's no evidence of that. Some of what these geneticists are calling "Eurasian" is no doubt shared common ancestry from the African population that spawned OOA migrations as noted here below:
Hence in conclusion we argue that the X-chromosome evidence presented here shows a genetic continuity ranging from Sub-Saharan Africa, through North-Eastern Africa, into the Near East. However, the reduction in Tn diversity does suggest that a population bottleneck occurred in Ethiopia, associated with a major out of Africa expansion(s), which parallels the conclusion made by Tishkoff et al. (1996) from analysis of the CD4 locus. Certainly our data are not incompatible with the argument from Tishkoff et al. (1996) that an element of the contempo-rary Ethiopian population may be descendants of the ancestral population that spawned the migration out of Africa. We also argue, however, that in addition to this early bottleneck event, later periods of admixture have played a major role in shaping the gene pool of Ethiopia, and its populations display both Eurasian and Sub-Saharan genetic influences. While these results are from the analysis of just one locus, and samples sizes for a number of populations remain relatively small (particularly in the case of the Oromo and the Ethiopian Jews), we feel that in association with data from other marker systems they add a complemen-tary perspective to the history of Ethiopia and her peoples.
Ethiopia: between Sub-Saharan Africa and Western Eurasia
There is no doubt that Horners have Eurasian mixture, just not to the tune of 38-50%.
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Note: the study I cited controlled for ascertainment bias......that makes a huge difference.
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elijah The Tishbite: I guess you can't read, the 4 or 5 ancestries that Ethiopians and Somalis have according to THAT study in 2014 are Lowland eastern Cushitic, Nilo-Saharan, Omotic, Arabian, and in the case of the Tigray only, Levantine Caucasian. That 30-50% Eurasian figure is way overstated and what "multiple waves" of Eurasians migrated into the Horn? There's no evidence of that. Some of what these geneticists are calling "Eurasian" is no doubt shared common ancestry from the African population that spawned OOA migrations as noted here below:
Hence in conclusion we argue that the X-chromosome evidence presented here shows a genetic continuity ranging from Sub-Saharan Africa, through North-Eastern Africa, into the Near East. However, the reduction in Tn diversity does suggest that a population bottleneck occurred in Ethiopia, associated with a major out of Africa expansion(s), which parallels the conclusion made by Tishkoff et al. (1996) from analysis of the CD4 locus. Certainly our data are not incompatible with the argument from Tishkoff et al. (1996) that an element of the contempo-rary Ethiopian population may be descendants of the ancestral population that spawned the migration out of Africa. We also argue, however, that in addition to this early bottleneck event, later periods of admixture have played a major role in shaping the gene pool of Ethiopia, and its populations display both Eurasian and Sub-Saharan genetic influences. While these results are from the analysis of just one locus, and samples sizes for a number of populations remain relatively small (particularly in the case of the Oromo and the Ethiopian Jews), we feel that in association with data from other marker systems they add a complemen-tary perspective to the history of Ethiopia and her peoples.
Ethiopia: between Sub-Saharan Africa and Western Eurasia
There is no doubt that Horners have Eurasian mixture, just not to the tune of 38-50%. [/QB]
You clearly don't know what you're talking about : are you at least aware what this "lowland eastern cushitic" component is ? Also you haven't even paid attention since a large part of their DNA in that paper is classified as "undefined" so you should question their proxies.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elijah The Tishbite: I guess you can't read, the 4 or 5 ancestries that Ethiopians and Somalis have according to THAT study in 2014 are Lowland eastern Cushitic, Nilo-Saharan, Omotic, Arabian, and in the case of the Tigray only, Levantine Caucasian. That 30-50% Eurasian figure is way overstated and what "multiple waves" of Eurasians migrated into the Horn? There's no evidence of that. Some of what these geneticists are calling "Eurasian" is no doubt shared common ancestry from the African population that spawned OOA migrations as noted here below:
Hence in conclusion we argue that the X-chromosome evidence presented here shows a genetic continuity ranging from Sub-Saharan Africa, through North-Eastern Africa, into the Near East. However, the reduction in Tn diversity does suggest that a population bottleneck occurred in Ethiopia, associated with a major out of Africa expansion(s), which parallels the conclusion made by Tishkoff et al. (1996) from analysis of the CD4 locus. Certainly our data are not incompatible with the argument from Tishkoff et al. (1996) that an element of the contempo-rary Ethiopian population may be descendants of the ancestral population that spawned the migration out of Africa. We also argue, however, that in addition to this early bottleneck event, later periods of admixture have played a major role in shaping the gene pool of Ethiopia, and its populations display both Eurasian and Sub-Saharan genetic influences. While these results are from the analysis of just one locus, and samples sizes for a number of populations remain relatively small (particularly in the case of the Oromo and the Ethiopian Jews), we feel that in association with data from other marker systems they add a complemen-tary perspective to the history of Ethiopia and her peoples.
Ethiopia: between Sub-Saharan Africa and Western Eurasia
There is no doubt that Horners have Eurasian mixture, just not to the tune of 38-50%.
You clearly don't know what you're talking about : are you at least aware what this "lowland eastern cushitic" component is ? Also you haven't even paid attention since a large part of their DNA in that paper is classified as "undefined" so you should question their proxies. [/QB]
Lowland Eastern Cushitic is not Eurasian and nearly all of the populations have ancestry labeled as undefined, undefined doesn't equal Eurasian. The paper just isn't saying what you like.
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elijah The Tishbite: Lowland Eastern Cushitic is not Eurasian and nearly all of the populations have ancestry labeled as undefined, undefined doesn't equal Eurasian. The paper just isn't saying what you like. [/QB]
It is part eurasian and "undefined" can hide additional eurasian admixture you simply can't know it since their models are flawed. Literally large part of their dna is missing and you dare to draw conclusion from this ? Also why are you avoiding the paper I posted ?
Like I said to Djehuti, you can try to make it 100% african it won't make it "black" and blacks like you would lack it. It would be shared ancestry with eurasians and would explain why they plot in an intermediate position between the eurasian and west/central african cluster. People from the Horn of Africa, dark skinned or not are much closer to north africans and middle eastern people than West/Central/South/east africans.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elijah The Tishbite: Lowland Eastern Cushitic is not Eurasian and nearly all of the populations have ancestry labeled as undefined, undefined doesn't equal Eurasian. The paper just isn't saying what you like.
It is part eurasian and "undefined" can hide additional eurasian admixture you simply can't know it since their models are flawed. Literally large part of their dna is missing and you dare to draw conclusion from this ? Also why are you avoiding the paper I posted ?
Like I said to Djehuti, you can try to make it 100% african it won't make it "black" and blacks like you would lack it. It would be shared ancestry with eurasians and would explain why they plot in an intermediate position between the eurasian and west/central african cluster. People from the Horn of Africa, dark skinned or not are much closer to north africans and middle eastern people than West/Central/South/east africans. [/QB]
Undefined doesn't equal Eurasian, it could just as well be OOA ancestry which they do have. I'm not feeding into any of those strawman arguments you're trying to bait me into, no one ever said a thing about West and central Africans in regards to the ancestry of Horners, the paper clear says they lack Niger-Congo ancestry, the top three ancestries they have are Lowland Eastern Cushitic, Nilo-Saharan, and Omotic and last Arabian. The only thing drawing them "closer" to you are OOA ancestry and the Arabian component yall share.
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
Afar 10.5% Arabian Ethiopia Jews 13.6 Arabian Ethiopian Amhara 14.7 Arabian Ethiopian Oromo 5.1 Arabian Ethiopian Somali 0% Arabian Ethiopian Tigray 16.3 Arabian/Levantine Caucasian 6.1% Oromo 10.3% Arabian Tygray 14.4% Arabian Wolayta 6.1% Arabian
Also from the study:
The Amhara, Oromo and Wolayta samples from Ethiopia had Lowland East Cushitic, Nilo-Saharan, Omotic and Arabian ancestry and the Tygray sample also had a small amount of Levantine-Caucasian ancestry (Supplementary Table 1). These samples of Ethiopians had no Niger-Congo or European ancestry (Supplementary Table 1). These results indicate that the YRI and CEU samples are not optimal choices as proxies for the parental populations of Ethiopians. Furthermore, these Ethiopian samples have four or five ancestries and therefore should not be modeled by two-way admixture. As with the Mozabite sample, use of the YRI and CEU samples as proxies for the parental populations for the Ethiopians will lead to reconstruction of excessively short haplotypes, estimation of excessively long times since admixture began and poor estimates of admixture proportions. [/QB]
Somalis and Ethiopians are quite dark, about the same complexion as West and Central Africans on average, yet some really believe they are close to 50% "Eurasian." What this tells me is that unless those so called "Eurasians" thats supposedly migrated into the Horn and mixed with them were also just as dark, we must call into question the true quantity of "Eurasian" they really are
These men could be of haplogroup J1 which is considered Eurasian and Yemenis carry at 72% frequency but since they are dark, if one had a child with an Ethiopian woman, and say she was of the East African Hg L4, the children would be dark So you couldn't look at the child and assume they were not 50% Eurasian because they are too light, you would not be able to tell just by looking. The child could be 50% "Eurasian" or not
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elijah The Tishbite: Undefined doesn't equal Eurasian, it could just as well be OOA ancestry which they do have. I'm not feeding into any of those strawman arguments you're trying to bait me into, no one ever said a thing about West and central Africans in regards to the ancestry of Horners, the paper clear says they lack Niger-Congo ancestry, the top three ancestries they have are Lowland Eastern Cushitic, Nilo-Saharan, and Omotic and last Arabian. The only thing drawing them "closer" to you are OOA ancestry and the Arabian component yall share. [/QB]
Undefined doesn't equal african either and confirms that your paper is flawed and incomplete. Again why do you avoid the paper I posted ? Seems like you simply prefer to twist and cherrypick anything that supports your worldview.
Moreover stop playing the hypocrite with me. We all know where this is going with your "muh full african". You need to acknowledge the existence of Africans with a significant amount of Eurasian ancestry, and you should avoid imposing American labels on us or dictating how we should identify. Your initial notion that Horners are too dark to be part eurasian is baseless. It is inaccurate to assume that all eurasians are as pale as the whites you have in America. Moreover, the non-Eurasian admixed ethnicities in this region of Africa are literally the darkest humans.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Undefined doesn't equal african either and confirms that your paper is flawed and incomplete. Again why do you avoid the paper I posted ? Seems like you simply prefer to twist and cherrypick anything that supports your worldview.
The paper I cited is not flawed nor incomplete and I stated that Horners have Eurasian ancestry, just not at the levels you state them to be. Undefined is undefined and I never stated it was African nor Eurasian. Moreover the paper I cited controlled for ascertainment bias which you over look and ignore.
quote:Moreover stop playing the hypocrite with me. We all know where this is going with your "muh full african". You need to acknowledge the existence of Africans with a significant amount of Eurasian ancestry,
You're not a Horners and who's imposing labels on whom? Nobody stated Horners were pure, nor fully genetically African, again, I stated they have Eurasian ancestry, just not at the levels you think they have.
quote: and you should avoid imposing American labels on us or dictating how we should identify
Point out where I imposed labels. You have a habit of promoting that true Negro BS in this forum. You label people black on one hand like southern Nubians, they complain about putting American labels on to people.
quote:. Your initial notion that Horners are too dark to be part eurasian is baseless. It is inaccurate to assume that all eurasians are as pale as the whites you have in America. Moreover, the non-Eurasian admixed ethnicities in this region of Africa are literally the darkest humans.
My position is simple, these people are among the darkest in the world skin color wise despite their facial features which you call Eurasian and it was YOU who made a topic posting very light skinned Horners and implying they got that skin color from southern Arabians
Again, I never stated they have no Eurasian ancestry
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
Amena: "the North African could be Arab because the North African according to 23andme they includes Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia " (+ on screen: Algeria, Bharani, Bedouin, Jordanian, Kuwati, Mozabite, Palestinian, Emirati)
___________________________________
In the Ethiopian genetics test video Elias, an Amhara Ethiopian wants to be "pure African" His autosomal results say he is 100% African His Y DNA is J-M267 and his mtDNA is R0
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elijah The Tishbite: The paper I cited is not flawed nor incomplete and I stated that Horners have Eurasian ancestry, just not at the levels you state them to be. Undefined is undefined and I never stated it was African nor Eurasian. Moreover the paper I cited controlled for ascertainment bias which you over look and ignore.
It is flawed and incomplete when a large part of the DNA in question is classified as "undefined" and when it's using misleading labels of part eurasian components.
"Ascertainment bias" he says XD Address Pickrell et al. 2014 instead.
quote:Originally posted by Elijah The Tishbite: You're not a Horners and who's imposing labels on whom? Nobody stated Horners were pure, nor fully genetically African, again, I stated they have Eurasian ancestry, just not at the levels you think they have.
Point out where I imposed labels. You have a habit of promoting that true Negro BS in this forum. You label people black on one hand like southern Nubians, they complain about putting American labels on to people.
My position is simple, these people are among the darkest in the world skin color wise despite their facial features which you call Eurasian and it was YOU who made a topic posting very light skinned Horners and implying they got that skin color from southern Arabians
Again, I never stated they have no Eurasian ancestry [/QB]
But who are you to speak like if you were an authority in the field ? You literally have no evidence that they are not 40-50% eurasian. But even if you were right, that component would still be similar to what's outside Africa. Genetics doesn't care about your continental labels and this won't change that they're genetically closer to eurasians.
Anyway I speak for them because I already had this discussion with somalis and they all agreed with me. We're simply fed up with insecure and rootless americans telling us how we should identify and who were our ancestors.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:It is flawed and incomplete when a large part of the DNA in question is classified as "undefined" and when it's using misleading labels of part eurasian components.
"Ascertainment bias" he says XD Address Pickrell et al. 2014 instead.
The study I cited is not flawed, end of story.
quote:But who are you to speak like if you were an authority in the field ? You literally have no evidence that they are not 40-50% eurasian. But even if you were right, that component would still be similar to what's outside Africa. Genetics doesn't care about your continental labels and this won't change that they're genetically closer to eurasians.
The study I just cited shows they are not 40-50 Eurasian, at least not most of them so cut the cap. I cited a study to back up what I said so I'm not imposing anything on anyone, you are. They are "closer" to Eurasians just like Yoruba are more "closer" to Eurasians than they are to Pygmies, lol. Their closeness a is because of common shared ancestry from OOA and so Eurasian mixture, no more no less, you use labels when it suits you and reject them when it suits you. The average Horner walking down the block in Philly isn't going to get a second look and you know why.
quote:Anyway I speak for them because I already had this discussion with somalis and they all agreed with me. We're simply fed up with insecure and rootless americans telling us how we should identify and who were our ancestors. [/QB]
You can't speak for all Horners nor for anyone except yourself, the topic is about mixture and skin color, not about how one identifies so get the hell off the post trying to build up a strawman to knock down.
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elijah The Tishbite: The study I cited is not flawed, end of story.
It is. Period. Address Pickrell et al. 2014 now
quote:Originally posted by Elijah The Tishbite: The study I just cited shows they are not 40-50 Eurasian, at least not most of them so cut the cap. I cited a study to back up what I said so I'm not imposing anything on anyone, you are. They are "closer" to Eurasians just like Yoruba are more "closer" to Eurasians than they are to Pygmies, lol. Their closeness a is because of common shared ancestry from OOA and so Eurasian mixture, no more no less, you use labels when it suits you and reject them when it suits you. The average Horner walking down the block in Philly isn't going to get a second look and you know why.
Your study does not contradict the 40-50% eurasian ancestry, it's simply you who restrict it to "arabian".
Moreover Yoruba are in fact closer to pygmies than eurasians :
And I don't care about how americans perceive them. I care about genetic data only.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
Amena: "the North African could be Arab because the North African according to 23andme they includes Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia " (+ on screen: Algeria, Bharani, Bedouin, Jordanian, Kuwati, Mozabite, Palestinian, Emirati)
___________________________________
Autosomal vs Haplogroup
In the Ethiopian genetics test video Elias, an Amhara Ethiopian wants to be "pure African" His autosomal results say he is 100% African His Y DNA is J-M267 and his mtDNA is R0 [/QB]
Seems like they first tested him and the result did not show 100% African. Then they tested again and now he became 100% African. Once again a discrepancy between tests. It seems they used the same company, but that the company maybe had better material for comparisons than the first time.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2683 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
posted
The study I posted is the more credible one since it accounted for ascertainment bias and sampl more populations
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
Amena: "the North African could be Arab because the North African according to 23andme they includes Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia " (+ on screen: Algeria, Bharani, Bedouin, Jordanian, Kuwati, Mozabite, Palestinian, Emirati)
___________________________________
Autosomal vs Haplogroup
In the Ethiopian genetics test video Elias, an Amhara Ethiopian wants to be "pure African" His autosomal results say he is 100% African His Y DNA is J-M267 and his mtDNA is R0
Seems like they first tested him and the result did not show 100% African. Then they tested again and now he became 100% African. Once again a discrepancy between tests. It seems they used the same company, but that the company maybe had better material for comparisons than the first time.
[/QB]
No, I've added the video dates to my post The top is actually after,
Africans Take a DNA Test (100% AFRICAN) | Amena and Elias 2019
this test said 100% African, (97.7 Ethiopian) 23and Me ________________________
BUT.. two years earlier he took the first test, of the parents Elias they made the first video:
Ethiopian Genetics Test Results | Amena and Elias
the result said 64.4% Sub Saharan and 32.9% Middle Eastern and North African and he is of the Y DNA Haplogroup J-M267 (regarded by geneticists as Middle Eastern) and maternal group R0
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
I look up recently what this chart meant by mandenka since it's spelled different then mandinka.
I see where the confusion was with me and could be with others and i am just clearing this up. I had to do some more research. The mandinka are in a number of countries in west africa of course.
The mandenka in that study is the mandinka on the more on the western parts of west africa in the sahel senegambia region,the country Guinea-Bissau and not eastern Maninka Mandinka of mali,Guinea etc..
A past study is for the Mandinka,Mandinka(mandingo,mandenka)but it's from 2004 and most do not have euro-asian dna looking at the MtDNA Profile of West Africa Guineans below. The mandenka,Mandinka for this study is population code SEM,language code mnk. https://iso639-3.sil.org/code/mnk https://www.ethnologue.com/language/mnk/
The Mande languages are spoken in several countries in West Africa by the Mandé peoples and include Maninka, Mandinka, Soninke, Bambara, Kpelle, Dioula, Bozo, Mende, Susu, and Vai. There are "60 to 75 languages spoken by 30 to 40 million people",[1] chiefly in Burkina Faso, Mali, Senegal, the Gambia, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Sierra Leone, Liberia, and Ivory Coast, and also in northwestern Nigeria and northern Benin.
Maninka (also known as Malinke), or more precisely Eastern Maninka, is the name of several closely related languages and dialects of the southeastern Manding subgroup of the Mande language family. It is the mother tongue of the Malinké people in Guinea, where it is spoken by 3,300,000 people and is the main language in the Upper Guinea region, and in Mali, where the closely related Bambara is a national language, as well as in Liberia, Senegal, Sierra Leone and Ivory Coast, where it has no official status. It was the language of court and government during the Mali Empire.
Mandinka language Not to be confused with Dinka language or Maninka language. The Mandinka language (Mandi'nka kango; Ajami: مَانْدِينْكَا كَانْجَوْ) or Mandingo, is a Mande language spoken by the Mandinka people of Guinea, northern Guinea-Bissau, the Casamance region of Senegal, and in The Gambia where it is one of the principal languages. Mandinka belongs to the Manding branch of Mande and is thus similar to Bambara and Maninka/Malinké but with only 5 instead of 7 vowels. In a majority of areas, it is a tonal language with two tones: low and high, although the particular variety spoken in the Gambia and Senegal borders on a pitch accent due to its proximity with non-tonal neighboring languages like Wolof. Native speakers 1.3 million (2001–2016) Native to Senegal, The Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, and Guinea https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manding_languages#/media/File:Map_of_the_Manding_language_continuum.png
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: No, I've added the video dates to my post The top is actually after,
Africans Take a DNA Test (100% AFRICAN) | Amena and Elias 2019
this test was the typical basic DNA test autosomal and it said 100% African, (97.7 Ethiopian) ________________________
BUT.. the two years earlier he took the first test, of the parents Elias This was Y DNA and mtDNA This tests is a little more expensive. Typically people take this test after their autosomal but not on this case so in 2017, they made the first video:
Ethiopian Genetics Test Results | Amena and Elias
So with this different type of analysis the report said 64.4% Sub Saharan and 32.9% Middle Eastern and North African and he is of the Y DNA Haplogroup J-M267 (regarded by geneticists as Middle Eastern) and maternal group R0
The later autosomal test does not deal with haplogroups and both types of tests are valid in their own way
However, we can how see how the results are giving percentage of Africans differently
Sometimes people take one type of tests and don't like the result so they take a different type, then cross their fingers it will return a different result ____________________
This is a different situation from Aysha Harun, se took the same autosomal test from two different companies and got different results That has to do with what samples each company has and how they interpret
To make it clear, with the first video I meant the one that was made first, 2017, which is the video named:
The result from the 2017 video can be seen at the left and the result from the 2019 video is seen to the right in the picture:
. [/QB]
I updated my other post
What we have here are two tests kits by 23andMe, 2017 and 2019
and I now recall 23andMe gives you autosomal with Y and mtDNA haplogroup results included
So his Y haplogroup is J-M267 and mtDNA is R0
the percentages are all autosomal, both 2017 and 2019, two of the same type of tests by 23andMe producing different autosomal results, two years later, no change of haplogroups
We can see to an extent what happened on the left 2017 under "Sub-Saharan" 64.4% "Middle Eastern & North African 39.4% " However they broke that down further as North African 32.7% and Broadly Middle Eastern only 0.2%
So in 2019 it seems that this DNA which had largely been classified as North African 32.7% is then deemed "Sub-Saharan", Ethiopian in particular
I don't know to what extent this is due to a larger database of samples and to what extent they may have changed they way they classify
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
*In todays Model* East African HG + North African Neolithic + Central Saharan Neolithic Pastoral + Neolithic West Asia Herder/Farmer = "Ethiopian" These components crystalized 1000's of years ago.
Thus TODAY, when a modern Day "Ethiopian" who's grandparents and great grandparents are all from Ethiopia they are simply 100% Ethiopian as 23andMe is only going back a few hundred years.
It would be like ME taking a DNA test in 2423 and the results coming up 100% African American. They are not breaking down exactly what "African American entails, in its mosaic of Ancestry just giving your very recent ancestral origins. I have broken this down before in depth earlier. Search.
In 2023 yall are wasting yall time arguing against Horn of Africans having admixture from either North Africa and Levant/Arabia. All the models are just that admixture "Models"
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: *In todays Model* East African HG + North African Neolithic + Central Saharan Neolithic Pastoral + Neolithic West Asia Herder/Farmer = "Ethiopian" These components crystalized 1000's of years ago.
Thus TODAY, when a modern Day "Ethiopian" who's grandparents and great grandparents are all from Ethiopia they are simply 100% Ethiopian as 23andMe is only going back a few hundred years.
It would be like ME taking a DNA test in 2423 and the results coming up 100% African American. They are not breaking down exactly what "African American entails, in its mosaic of Ancestry just giving your very recent ancestral origins. I have broken this down before in depth earlier. Search.
In 2023 yall are wasting yall time arguing against Horn of Africans having admixture from either North Africa and Levant/Arabia. All the models are just that admixture "Models"
In 2017 Elias, an Ethiopian man tests with 23andMe, his haplogroup is J and his mtDNA is R0 His autosomal analysis says 64.4% Sub-Saharan and that breaks down to, East African 63.6%
Then in 2019 he takes the test again and it says
100% Sub Saharan 99.7% Ethiopian and Eritrean
And in the video he's happy about the update, it says not only is he 100% African he's pretty close to being 100% Ethiopian (and Eritrean) according to the test. In the video he is also happy about being "pure African"
People also have national pride. Someone who regards themselves as French and is proud of it, if they do an ancestry test and it says 31% English, 13% Bulgarian, they might find it interesting but not really like it, all of the sudden they feel like they are not as French (or Ethiopian, or whatever)as they thought, might worry somebody might rise an eyebrow on them
My question is Are the for-profit testing companies designing their tests to lean toward a less admixed result? A lot of customers would be happier that way, your 90% or 100% what you want to be. The test would not be false but just using with different terminology, a simpler ethnic breakdown compared to a more complicated one > but this could be chosen to satisfy the customer which is not exactly objectivity
Like this dude Elias, He has an Ethiopian accent, I didn't look into his background but he was probably born there. Now when he goes out and meets people and if they ask where is he from he can say "I'm 99.7% Ethiopian baby, genetics prove it"
And a lot of ES vets would say "see, I told you he's lighter but that is due to African diversity, no back migrations needed"
And if there were other darker Ethiopians who ever cast suspicion on him that being lighter he might not be "fully" Ethiopian, he can show the 2019 tests results on his phone, "wrong bro, I'm 99.7% Ethiopian, got the proof right here"
I'm not saying his lighter skin is due to admixture, that may or may not be African variation but as per autosomal DNA we can see how categorization methods can produce different percentage results, many thousands of people taking these tests and with a lot of personal expectations to who they are or are not. And with an ever increasing database you can keep buying the tests over the years seeing if the results are different 5 years later. >> But if you like the last one you got, you might not want to
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: *In todays Model* East African HG + North African Neolithic + Central Saharan Neolithic Pastoral + Neolithic West Asia Herder/Farmer = "Ethiopian" These components crystalized 1000's of years ago.
Thus TODAY, when a modern Day "Ethiopian" who's grandparents and great grandparents are all from Ethiopia they are simply 100% Ethiopian as 23andMe is only going back a few hundred years.
I said this exact same thing in another thread but you of course articulated it better.
It would be like ME taking a DNA test in 2423 and the results coming up 100% African American. They are not breaking down exactly what "African American entails, in its mosaic of Ancestry just giving your very recent ancestral origins. I have broken this down before in depth earlier. Search.
In 2023 yall are wasting yall time arguing against Horn of Africans having admixture from either North Africa and Levant/Arabia. All the models are just that admixture "Models"
I said the same thing in another thread, but of course you articulated it better.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's what they are doing to satisfy customers, more sales > the LESS you break it down, people want to be a "pure" as possible, go back to the basics, give them what they want
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic