Topic: In First, Archaeologists Extract DNA of 2 "Ancient Israelites"
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
@Djehuti
I thought I read that it was more (same with sephardim) but I must have been mistaken. Regardless, that doesn't mean I hate them. Do they (or anyone else) hate black people when they claim E is not Israelite and that it is "sub-saharan african"?
Regarding the "Cohen" marker, do we have Aaron's DNA to confirm that this is what he had?
.........
Posts: 2493 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tazarah: Ashkenazi also carry E in large numbers in case you didn't know.
Apparently not that large.
You have yet to explain why the modal cohen marker is J1 not E. If we are to identify cohen men as descendants of Aaron, that would make him and is brother Moses J carriers not E.
^^what is the source of that
compare:
Here Portuguese total E is 8.7% Ashkenazis in various studies 16-23% E
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Portuguese crypto-Jews: the genetic heritage of a complex history Inês Nogueiro1, et al.
Data from the Iberian Peninsula, the original geographic source of Sephardic Jews, is limited to two populations in Portugal, Belmonte, and Bragança district, and the Chueta community from Mallorca. Belmonte was the first Jewish community studied for uniparental markers.
Y Chromosome in Sephardic Portuguese Jews The profile of male lineages in Portugal was drafted in a study comprising 663 male samples from the 18 administrative districts of Portugal and a typical western European composition was demonstrated by the high frequencies of haplogroups R1b1a-M269 (57.7%), I-M170 (6.1%), G-M201 (5.5%), and E1b1b-M81 (5.6%), as well as a Middle Eastern influence, denoted by the presence of J-12f2.1 lineage (10.4%; Beleza et al., 2006). Possible Sephardic contributions to this genetic pool were also addressed in some reports (Goncalves et al., 2005; Pacheco et al., 2005) but very little was known about the Portuguese Jews, even though, in a large scale study of the Iberian genetic diversity, very few Jewish male samples from Belmonte were analyzed (Adams et al., 2008).
The genetic profile of the Portuguese Jewish and non-Jewish male lineages can be seen in Figure 2. The Y chromosome SNPs analyzed allowed the definition of just three different lineages in Belmonte Jews: eleven individuals were classified as J-12f2.1, four as R1b1a-M269 and one as G-M201, with a frequency of 68.8, 25 and 6.2% respectively. The analyses of the STRs DYS19, DYS388, DYS389I-II, DYS390, DYS391, DYS392, DYS393, DYS438, DYS439, DYS385a, and DYS385b revealed a total of only four distinct haplotypes. In the R1b1a-M269 haplogroup two different haplotypes were detected, diverging one from the other by one mutation step (DYS389II), inside the J-12f2.1 haplogroup all the eleven individuals presented exactly the same haplotype, reflecting very low levels of genetic diversity among this Jewish community.
A completely different picture of the Portuguese male Jewish lineages was, however, brought to light when the descendants of the crypto-Jews from Bragança district were analyzed (Nogueiro et al., 2010). In this study, 57 unrelated self-designated Jewish males from the Northeast Portugal (Bragança, Argozelo, Carção, Mogadouro, and Vilarinho dos Galegos) were selected, using a combination of geographic, religious ethno-historical and affiliation criteria.
The SNPs typed allowed the discrimination of 10 different haplogroups and the analysis of the Y-STR loci revealed 41 different haplotypes. The most frequent haplogroups found were R1b1a-M269, J-12f2.1, and T-M70, adding up to 80.7% of the total sample (Figure 2).
The effect of genetic drift in an isolated, small sized population could explain the high frequency found in Bragança for lineages typically predominant in other Jewish populations, such as J-12f2.1 (36.8%) and T-M70 (15.8%). However, the high haplogroup diversity combined with the high (intra-haplogroup) haplotypic diversity are extremely surprising, as they show exactly the opposite of what is expected, namely a deep genetic diversity loss. Although inbreeding practices were sustained by the Portuguese crypto-Jewish communities, in the light of the obtained results it seems that its effects were less pronounced in the Bragança district compared to Belmonte, due probably to complex mating strategies and/or a very heterogeneous genetic pool in their origin.
Haplogroup J-12f2.1 has a Middle Eastern origin and includes two groups, the J1-M267 and the J2-M172. Lineage J2-M172 is more common and is widely spread over Europe, particularly in the Mediterranean basin (Semino et al., 2004). Haplogroup J-12f2.1 presents a decreasing gradient from its origin toward Europe and is associated with the demic diffusion of the Neolithic farmers (Underhill et al., 2001; Semino et al., 2004) and also to more recent events, such as the Phoenician maritime migrations along the Mediterranean (Hammer et al., 2000; Di Giacomo et al., 2004; Zalloua et al., 2008).
This haplogroup is referred to as being predominant in diverse referenced Jewish populations (Hammer et al., 1997, 2000; Nebel et al., 2001; Adams et al., 2008), reaching in Sephardic Jews, frequencies above 40% (Semino et al., 2004; Adams et al., 2008). While in Portugal it accounts for 3.4% of J-12f2.1 and 7% of J2-M172 lineages (Beleza et al., 2005) in the Portuguese Jews, it reached values of 68.2% for J-12f2.1 in Belmonte, 12.3% and 24.5% for J1-M267 and J2-M172 respectively, in the Bragança district.
The high frequencies of J-12f2.1 haplogroup found in both groups of Portuguese Jews, compared to the non-Jewish Portuguese host population, could therefore represent part of the genetic pool of the ancestral Sephardic population that established the first Jewish settlements in Portugal. For this lineage, again, no exact matches were found between the haplotypes of Belmonte and Bragança district. Three mutational steps apart, one haplotype of Belmonte matches five individuals from Bragança, Carção, Argozelo, and Vilarinho dos Galegos.
The presence of the mutation M70 defines haplogroup T. Its origin is attributed to the Middle East (Underhill et al., 2001) and from there it spread along the Mediterranean and East Africa. It is a rather rare haplogroup, displaying a global frequency of around 1% (King et al., 2007), but nonetheless it is found at quite high frequencies in Sephardic Levites (23%) and Sephardic Israelis (13%; Behar et al., 2004).
In Portugal it accounts for just 1.6% (Beleza et al., 2006) but reaches 15.8% in Bragança district Jews, being absent in the Belmonte samples. This lineage probably represents a relic of the original Sephardic male genetic pool, since it appears with similar frequencies in Israeli Sephardic Jews, but is quite rare in the Mediterranean coast and in Iberia.
Several other haplogroups were detected in the NE Portuguese Jews with residual frequencies, namely E1b1b-M78 with 3.5%, E1b1b-M81 with 5.2%, I-M170with 3.5% R1b1-P25 with 1.8%, R1a-SRY10831.2 with 1.8%, and G-M201 with 3.5%.
G-M201 was also detected in Belmonte (6.2%) at about the same frequency as in the non-Jewish Portuguese population. Adams et al. (2008) suggested that this haplogroup could reveal an introgression of Sephardic Jews into the Iberian population. However, the estimated age for this lineage in Portugal (Beleza et al., 2005) is consistent with its introduction during the Neolithic and the results of relative frequencies and STR variance inside this lineage from Adams et al. (2008) does not allow the definition of the gene flow direction.
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
28 And Haran died before his father Terah in the land of his nativity, in Ur of the Chaldees.
31 And Terah took Abram his son, and Lot the son of Haran his son's son, and Sarai his daughter in law, his son Abram's wife; and they went forth with them from Ur of the Chaldees, to go into the land of Canaan; and they came unto Haran, and dwelt there.
Genesis 15:7 And he said unto him, I am the Lord that brought thee out of Ur of the Chaldees, to give thee this land to inherit it.
Nehemiah 9:7 Thou art the Lord the God, who didst choose Abram, and broughtest him forth out of Ur of the Chaldees, and gavest him the name of Abraham;
Unlike the East Semitic Akkadian-speaking Akkadians, Assyrians and Babylonians, whose ancestors had been established in Mesopotamia since at least the 30th century BC, the Chaldeans were not a native Mesopotamian people, but were late 10th or early 9th century BC West Semitic Levantine migrants to the southeastern corner of the region, who had played no part in the previous 3,000 years or so of Sumero-Akkadian and Assyro-Babylonian Mesopotamian civilization and history.
The ancient Chaldeans seem to have migrated into Mesopotamia sometime between c. 940–860 BC, a century or so after other new Semitic arrivals, the Arameans and the Suteans, appeared in Babylonia, c. 1100 BC. According to Ran Zadok, they first appear in written record in cylinder inscriptions of the King of Mari Aššur-ketta-lēšir II (late 12th-early 11th century BC), which record them reaching Messopotamia as early as the 11th century BC. They later appear in the annals of the Assyrian king Shalmaneser III during the 850s BC. This was a period of weakness in Babylonia, and its ineffectual native kings were unable to prevent new waves of semi-nomadic foreign peoples from invading and settling in the land.
Though belonging to the same West Semitic speaking ethnic group and migrating from the same Levantine regions as the earlier arriving Aramaeans, they are to be differentiated; the Assyrian king Sennacherib, for example, carefully distinguishes them in his inscriptions.
The Chaldeans were for a time able to keep their identity despite the dominant native Assyro-Babylonian (Sumero-Akkadian-derived) culture although, as was the case for the earlier Amorites, Kassites and Suteans before them, by the time Babylon fell in 539 BC, perhaps before, the Chaldeans ceased to exist as a specific race of people.
In the Hebrew Bible, "Ur of the Chaldees" (Ur Kaśdim) is cited as the starting point of the patriarch Abraham's journey to Canaan.
Language Ancient Chaldeans originally spoke a West Semitic language similar to the ancient Aramaic language.[20] During the Neo-Assyrian Empire, the Assyrian king Tiglath-Pileser III introduced an Eastern Aramaic dialect as the lingua franca of his empire in the mid-8th century BC. As a result of this innovation, in late periods both the Babylonian and Assyrian dialects of Akkadian became marginalized, and Akkadian influenced Mesopotamian Aramaic took its place across Mesopotamia, including among the Chaldeans, and later, also the Levant. One form of this once widespread Aramaic language was used in some books of the Hebrew Bible (the Book of Daniel and the Book of Ezra). The use of the name "Chaldean" (Chaldaic, Chaldee) to describe it, first introduced by Jerome of Stridon (d. 420),[21] became common in early Aramaic studies, but that misnomer was later corrected, when modern scholars concluded that the Aramaic dialect used in the Hebrew Bible was not related to the ancient Chaldeans and their language
"Chaldea" came to be used in a wider sense, of Southern Mesopotamia in general, following the brief ascendancy of the Chaldeans during 608–557 BC. This is especially the case in the Hebrew Bible, which was substantially composed during this period (roughly corresponding to the period of Babylonian captivity). The Book of Jeremiah makes frequent reference to the Chaldeans (King James Version Chaldees following LXX Χαλδαίοι; in Biblical Hebrew as Kasdîm כַּשְׂדִּים). Book of Habakkuk 1:6 calls them "that bitter and hasty nation" (הַגֹּוי הַמַּר וְהַנִּמְהָר). Book of Isaiah 23:13 DRB states, “Behold the land of the Chaldeans, there was not such a people, the Assyrians founded it: they have led away the strong ones thereof into captivity, they have destroyed the houses thereof, they have brought it to ruin.
Name The name Chaldaea is a latinization of the Greek Khaldaía (Χαλδαία), a hellenization of Akkadian māt Kaldu or Kašdu, suggesting an underlying /kaɬdu/.[5] The name appears in Hebrew in the Bible as Kaśdim (כשדים)[6] and in Aramaic as Kaśdāy (כשדי).
In the Bible (Book of Genesis 22:22), the name "Kesed"(כשׂד, ancient pronunciation /kaɬd/[10]) , the singular form of "Kasdim"(כַּשְׂדִּים), meaning Chaldeans. Kesed is identified as son of Abraham's brother Nahor (and brother of Kemuel the father of Aram), residing in Aram Naharaim. Jewish historian Flavius Josephus (37 – c. 100) also links Arphaxad and Chaldaea, in his Antiquities of the Jews, stating, “Arphaxad named the Arphaxadites, who are now called Chaldeans.”
( a lot more at link)
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
^ still doesn't explain why Noah's recent descendants (for example the akkadians) are believed to have had E markers.
Posts: 2493 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tazarah: ^ still doesn't explain why Noah's recent descendants (for example the akkadians) are believed to have had E markers.
believed by who?
that's silliness there is a lot more reading to be done, plus the below, the whole thing not just the snippet
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
More in depth about the ancestry of Abraham. This is a long one with a lot of detail You could skip to the conclusions sections the last two paragraphs of it
quote: All things considered, I am in agreement with one archaeologist’s cautious assessment. “Woolley and others quickly linked [Tell el-Muqayyar] to the biblical ‘Ur of Chaldees,’” writes Eric Cline. The fundamental problem, however, is that “there were several sites in the ancient Near East that had the name Ur, just as there are many cities and towns in the United States today with the name ‘Troy,’ and it is not clear which city named Ur, if any, is to be associated with Abraham, just as none of the cities in the United States are actually associated with the original Trojan War.”127 The arguments for placing Abraham’s Ur in the north are rather enticing and, coupled with the added details provided in the book of Abraham, should not be dismissed lightly. Indeed, I am personally compelled in that direction in the search to locate Abraham’s Ur. But the evidence at this point, admittedly, does not definitively settle the debate one way or the other.
Additionally, even if it disputes the conclusions codified by Woolley, the book of Abraham should be given more than incidental deference as admissible evidence in this discussion. I therefore think the wisest course for now is caution and open-mindedness. The latter is especially crucial, for if we are going to satisfactorily answer this question, we must be willing to admit new evidence into the discussion if or when it surfaces, no matter how much it might challenge the scholarly consensus or a venerated tradition.
“In the Land of the Chaldeans” The Search for Abraham’s Homeland Revisited
Stephen O. Smoot is a graduate student at the University of Toronto, where he studies Near and Middle Eastern Civilizations with a concentration in Egyptology. He previously received bachelor’s degrees in Ancient Near Eastern Studies and German Studies from Brigham Young University. His work on biblical and Latter-day Saint topics has appeared in such venues as the Religious Studies Center at BYU, the Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, and the Interpreter Foundation.
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
@the lioness,
Experts, with more authority, credentials and experience than you.
Even Elmaestro asserted or implied that akkadians had E markers, but that they had nothing to do with Hebrews or Israelites since the akkadians would be descendants of Noah's grandson Cush. But what that ended up also demonstrating is that Noah's most recent descendants were believed to have E markers, which would logically entail that Shem did as well as Noah himself.
IF we follow genetic methodology.
SOURCE: "How Eurasia Was Born" HOW EURASIA WAS BORN -A Provisional Atlas of prehistoric Eurasia based on genetic data supporting the farming-language dispersal model- CSABA-BARNABÁS HORVÁTH
Posts: 2493 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
First of all, Lisa already pointed out earlier in the thread that Accad (Akkadians) descend from Ham's son Cush. So of course they were not descendants of Shem. And I myself already knew this as well. I only brought them up again to see how long you were going to continue trying to BS your way into a "victory" by attempting to cause intentional confusion.
flip-flopping more than a fish out of water
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
Were you looking in the mirror when you said that? Going along with Elmaestro's setup is not "flip flopping". You should know that because you actually flip flop better than anyone on this site.
Posts: 2493 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
Experts, with more authority, credentials and experience than you.
this comment is of an appeal-to-authority mentality of a religious fanatic
And> I posted several articles by people with more expertise and you simply ignore them.
And there are multiple different theories that are not in accord with each other all by experts, do you not know this?
We all believe in genetics here but anytime after you trying to make genetics based arguments, you remind us that you don't believe in genetics (escape hatch of the forked tongued)
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
^^^ I'm glad you said this, especially the last part. It's all just theory and nobody is 100% certain. Nor can we be 100% certain.
I think you meant to say you believe in theories that can't be 100% substantiated.
At least I admit I don't buy into it.
Y'all are in here arguing over Abraham's DNA.... without having Abraham's DNA.
Let that sink in.
There's nothing wrong with me pointing out the inconsistencies in what you believe.
Posts: 2493 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
Y'all are in here arguing over Abraham's DNA.... without having Abraham's DNA.
Let that sink in.
Do I need to quote you and then put the above below it and the two fitting like a glove?
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
@the lioness
Sure, just make sure you also include a quote of each time I said this is all speculation because nobody has Abraham's DNA
Posts: 2493 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
You weren't even inquisitive enough to investigate and realize that the J samples of my post were of a 10,000 year old stretch from the 9-8th millenia BC to modern times. That's from the early Neolithic till now. The E markers suggested to have gone to Mesopotamia were Early-Mid bronze age. You have been posting evidence suggesting E wasn't native this whole time. Still we on page 10 you couldn't see the bones I tossed at you smh.
You lost. Stop spamming the thread with information you don't know. Get some rest and study up then restate your opinions or open another thread where you can debate scripture.
Till now you've only helped me realize how realistic it was for Abraham and his many sons to carry macrohaplogroup J
Please don't waste the post count of this thread playing the victim.
//MODPosts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
@Elmaestro
I don't have time to hunt for your easter eggs.
You completely ignored the main point I made in my last response to you about the akkadians supposedly having E markers and how they were recent descendants of Noah (according to the Biblical narrative), which would mean they would have gotten it from him (according to genetic methodology). I mean, you yourself said the akkadians were "african", but ok fam.
And yes, I asked for evidence of ethnic mesopotamians having J because you agreed mespotamians would have been related to the Hebrews/Israelites and Abraham. But you produced no evidence of ethnic mesopotamians having J and are now criticizing me for asking for that evidence, even though you agreed to provide it.
Lastly, 90% of the comments I left in this thread were in response to comments that people made addressing me and engaging me; I don't spam. Am I supposed to not respond to them? Then I would get accused of running away. Claiming that I "don't know what I'm posting" when you don't even address the core points, and have admit to putting words in my mouth on more than one occasion, is funny.
But of course you make the rules and can accuse me of playing victim even though not everybody here even agrees with you. And of course you can declare victory and silence someone whenever you want. So with that being said, shalom.
P.S.......... as Doug intelligently pointed out, and as I have also pointed out: nobody has Abraham > Isaac > Jacob's DNA.
Posts: 2493 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
You completely ignored the main point I made in my last response to you about the akkadians supposedly having E markers and how that would relate to them being recent descendants of Noah, which would mean they would have gotten it from him, but ok fam.
And yes, I asked for evidence of ethnic mesopotamians having J because you agreed mespotamians would have been related to the Hebrews/Israelites and Abraham.
Lastly, 90% of the comments I left in this thread were in response to comments that people made addressing me and engaging me; I don't spam.
But of course you make the rules, so shalom.
This response is spam because these points were already addressed and simply restating them doesn't add anything but confusion to the thread.
J had a longstanding history in Mesopotamia since the time E was so called "dominant in the Levant". It dominated the region and had been there since before Abraham, Shem, or Noah... 8000 BC. And yet you question their ethnicity, smh.
Your main point about Akkadians had been addressed. It was addressed before you even knew about them. Do some research on the archaeology of Akkadians and check if the early Semitic settlers were outliers or not. Until you do at least that, I won't take anything you say on the subject seriously. As you yourself admitted you are not qualified to talk about the subject matter.
Also I don't make the rules, I enforce em.
Stop spamming please //ModPosts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
@Elmaestro
I asked you specifically to provide evidence of ethnic mespotamian civilizations possessing J markers, and you agreed to do it but didn't. In other words, an actual mesopotamian civilization (by name) that had J markers. Not individual samples. Once again: you agreed to do it but didn't, and now when I point this out your excuse is that I'm "doubting their ethnicity".
Your reponse about the akkadians doesn't make sense when we consider the fact that they were recent descendants of Noah through Ham according to the Bible, and they were believed to have E markers and were "african" according to you. Doesn't matter how long they had "been around" because they would have inherited that DNA from their ancestor(s) (Noah, etc.). Neither does a comment that I left days ago have any relevance to their Y-DNA.
But I think I'm done now, it's honestly pointless to continue going back and forth at this point when nobody has Abraham > Isaac > Jacob's DNA, and especially when I'm starting to get censored and threatened for pointing all of these things out.
Shalom, no hard feelings. SECOND WARNING. the nature of this post is SPAM, See comment below.
[ 13. November 2023, 06:19 PM: Message edited by: Elmaestro ]
Posts: 2493 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
I asked you specifically to provide evidence of ethnic mespotamian civilizations possessing J markers, and you agreed to do it but didn't. In other words, an actual mesopotamian civilization (by name) that had J markers. Not individual samples. Once again: you agreed to do it but didn't, and now when I point this out your excuse is that I'm "doubting their ethnicity".
Your reponse about the akkadians doesn't make sense when we consider the fact that they were recent descendants of Noah through Ham according to the Bible, and they were believed to have E markers and were "african" according to you. Doesn't matter how long they had "been around" according to you. Because they would have inherited that DNA from their ancestor(s). Neither does a comment that I left days ago have any relevance to their Y-DNA.
But I think I'm done now, it's honestly pointless to continue going back and forth at this point when nobody has Abraham > Isaac > Jacob's DNA, and especially when I'm starting to get censored and threatened for pointing all of these things out.
Shalom, no hard feelings.
Heh, Provide proof that actual Akkadians had E markers and I won't treat this comment as spam. Let's get some actual E possessing Akkadians, not TMRCA's from Modern samples. Hold yourself to the same bogus standard.
1 inane post removed
Please don't spam the thread.
//MODPosts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
Did you just delete my new comment?
Posts: 2493 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks DJ for being a good ambassador of your faith (though I remember you said you're not a religious person). What's going down here reminds me of a certain embarrassing Christian group in the US coming to the national bible quiz in my country and even losing to the Muslim contestants. They scored even worse than the atheist contestants (who only know the bible from lingering Christian traditions in this country).
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: Your main point about Akkadians had been addressed. It was addressed before you even knew about them. Do some research on the archaeology of Akkadians and check if the early Semitic settlers were outliers or not. Until you do at least that, I won't take anything you say on the subject seriously.
The mind boggling audacity of bringing up Akkadians and Mesopotamian E as something that he specifically introduced, and is teaching us about. He actually said that "everyone was ignoring Y-DNA E from Mesopotamia" that he only posted in the last couple of thread pages (note the victim complex he has, where everyone is against him). But he only posted this after several people had already spoken on the subject, starting from page 1 in this thread.
Some people will literally copy your arguments and not only fail to attribute you, but use it against you as something you need to be educated on. Just let it sink in how pathetic that is.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Thanks DJ for being a good ambassador of your faith (though I remember you said you're not a religious person). What's going down here reminds me of a certain embarrassing Christian group in the US coming to the national bible quiz in my country and even losing to the Muslim contestants. They scored even worse than the atheist contestants (who only know the bible from lingering Christian traditions in this country).
The reason why I've been so adamant about correcting his misinterpretations to downright perversion of scriptures is because there is already a lot of division amongst Christians as it is with all the denominations and such, but as you say too many Christians are ignorant about their own religion which leads to other problems. And by other problems not just apostasy but heresy which is even worse. It's worse because heresy is what lead to not only all these divisions and sects in Christianity but especially all these bizarre cults. Without proper doctrine based on the traditions of the church itself, you get all these Biblical perverts including literal sexual perverts like LDS and other sects with polygamy and who knows what else. Without proper doctrinal guidance, one can use the bible to justify almost anything. Are you aware that there are those you use Deuteronomy to justify pedophilia the type found in Islam ala Aisha's marriage??
By the way, more and more research is coming out showing that Islam as we know it today is also a perversion of an original Judeo-Christian Arab religion, but that's another story.
I never wanted this to become a religious argument so much as a historical one because despite the many claims to the contrary the Bible does indeed have a lot of historicity to it.
quote:Originally posted by Tazarah: @Djehuti
Exactly... Jacob's/ Israel's sons with the foreign women were still considered Israelites and tribal patriarchs which completely dismantles everything you said concerning the lineage not being solely paternal. In other words, the nation of Israel was formed via Jacob's/Israel's union with foreign women. His sons were 100% Israelite and tribal patriarchs.
What "foreign" women are you talking about??! LOL Which women were described as foreign?? None of Jacob's wives were described as foreign, yet you say they are. And when Paul addressed "Gentiles" you say he was addressing Jews! LOL It's like forcing a square peg into a round hole.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yea... Lets not slur other people's religions here. I do agree that without proper doctrine we do get a lot of mess.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
28 And Haran died before his father Terah in the land of his nativity, in Ur of the Chaldees.
31 And Terah took Abram his son, and Lot the son of Haran his son's son, and Sarai his daughter in law, his son Abram's wife; and they went forth with them from Ur of the Chaldees, to go into the land of Canaan; and they came unto Haran, and dwelt there.
Genesis 15:7 And he said unto him, I am the Lord that brought thee out of Ur of the Chaldees, to give thee this land to inherit it.
Nehemiah 9:7 Thou art the Lord the God, who didst choose Abram, and broughtest him forth out of Ur of the Chaldees, and gavest him the name of Abraham;
Unlike the East Semitic Akkadian-speaking Akkadians, Assyrians and Babylonians, whose ancestors had been established in Mesopotamia since at least the 30th century BC, the Chaldeans were not a native Mesopotamian people, but were late 10th or early 9th century BC West Semitic Levantine migrants to the southeastern corner of the region, who had played no part in the previous 3,000 years or so of Sumero-Akkadian and Assyro-Babylonian Mesopotamian civilization and history.
The ancient Chaldeans seem to have migrated into Mesopotamia sometime between c. 940–860 BC, a century or so after other new Semitic arrivals, the Arameans and the Suteans, appeared in Babylonia, c. 1100 BC. According to Ran Zadok, they first appear in written record in cylinder inscriptions of the King of Mari Aššur-ketta-lēšir II (late 12th-early 11th century BC), which record them reaching Messopotamia as early as the 11th century BC. They later appear in the annals of the Assyrian king Shalmaneser III during the 850s BC. This was a period of weakness in Babylonia, and its ineffectual native kings were unable to prevent new waves of semi-nomadic foreign peoples from invading and settling in the land.
Though belonging to the same West Semitic speaking ethnic group and migrating from the same Levantine regions as the earlier arriving Aramaeans, they are to be differentiated; the Assyrian king Sennacherib, for example, carefully distinguishes them in his inscriptions.
The Chaldeans were for a time able to keep their identity despite the dominant native Assyro-Babylonian (Sumero-Akkadian-derived) culture although, as was the case for the earlier Amorites, Kassites and Suteans before them, by the time Babylon fell in 539 BC, perhaps before, the Chaldeans ceased to exist as a specific race of people.
In the Hebrew Bible, "Ur of the Chaldees" (Ur Kaśdim) is cited as the starting point of the patriarch Abraham's journey to Canaan.
Language Ancient Chaldeans originally spoke a West Semitic language similar to the ancient Aramaic language.[20] During the Neo-Assyrian Empire, the Assyrian king Tiglath-Pileser III introduced an Eastern Aramaic dialect as the lingua franca of his empire in the mid-8th century BC. As a result of this innovation, in late periods both the Babylonian and Assyrian dialects of Akkadian became marginalized, and Akkadian influenced Mesopotamian Aramaic took its place across Mesopotamia, including among the Chaldeans, and later, also the Levant. One form of this once widespread Aramaic language was used in some books of the Hebrew Bible (the Book of Daniel and the Book of Ezra). The use of the name "Chaldean" (Chaldaic, Chaldee) to describe it, first introduced by Jerome of Stridon (d. 420),[21] became common in early Aramaic studies, but that misnomer was later corrected, when modern scholars concluded that the Aramaic dialect used in the Hebrew Bible was not related to the ancient Chaldeans and their language
"Chaldea" came to be used in a wider sense, of Southern Mesopotamia in general, following the brief ascendancy of the Chaldeans during 608–557 BC. This is especially the case in the Hebrew Bible, which was substantially composed during this period (roughly corresponding to the period of Babylonian captivity). The Book of Jeremiah makes frequent reference to the Chaldeans (King James Version Chaldees following LXX Χαλδαίοι; in Biblical Hebrew as Kasdîm כַּשְׂדִּים). Book of Habakkuk 1:6 calls them "that bitter and hasty nation" (הַגֹּוי הַמַּר וְהַנִּמְהָר). Book of Isaiah 23:13 DRB states, “Behold the land of the Chaldeans, there was not such a people, the Assyrians founded it: they have led away the strong ones thereof into captivity, they have destroyed the houses thereof, they have brought it to ruin.
Name The name Chaldaea is a latinization of the Greek Khaldaía (Χαλδαία), a hellenization of Akkadian māt Kaldu or Kašdu, suggesting an underlying /kaɬdu/.[5] The name appears in Hebrew in the Bible as Kaśdim (כשדים)[6] and in Aramaic as Kaśdāy (כשדי).
In the Bible (Book of Genesis 22:22), the name "Kesed"(כשׂד, ancient pronunciation /kaɬd/[10]) , the singular form of "Kasdim"(כַּשְׂדִּים), meaning Chaldeans. Kesed is identified as son of Abraham's brother Nahor (and brother of Kemuel the father of Aram), residing in Aram Naharaim. Jewish historian Flavius Josephus (37 – c. 100) also links Arphaxad and Chaldaea, in his Antiquities of the Jews, stating, “Arphaxad named the Arphaxadites, who are now called Chaldeans.”
( a lot more at link)
First of all "Ur" is a modernized Western shortening. The original Akkadian word was 'uru' and the Sumerian 'urim' which meant settlement or dwelling, though some try to identiy 'ur' with the Semitic word for light. You are correct though that Chaldeans were a West Semitic speaking group not an East Semitic group like the Akkadians and Eblaites. The closest related group to the Chaldeans are a people called the Suteans but linguistics has shown that the Chaldean language was not the same as Hebrew despite being part of that same sub-grouping as a West-Semitic language.
Also Chaldea is not the same as Kasdim.
And you know what else that many people don't realize?? Many people including myself at one time believed the Leonard Woolley propaganda (lie) that Abraham's Ur was the same as the Sumerian Ur in southern Mesopotamia, yet before Wooley's discovery it was taken for granted that Abraham's Ur Kasdim was located in northern Mesopotamia.
Jewish tradition itself says that the 'Home of the Prophets' was in northern Mesopotamia in the area of Naharin, and I believe there are even traditions of large stone monuments in the area which may very well be non other than Göbekli Tepe! (I wish Tukuler was here.)
But more importantly the Biblical narrative speaks of Abraham traveling in a straight direction from norther to south into Canaan and never from south to north.
What's crazy is that many Biblical scholars today keep perpetuating the southern Ur myth.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
I agree and would add as a caution to people coming here to lecture on religion, that familiarity with religion comes from normal religious practices, like bible study and contemplation of biblical ideas and monitoring and modeling oneself after biblical role models. It doesn't come from having a cheap left brain intellectual level understanding that goes no deeper than what is required to pull out scripture on demand to debate and fool people unfamiliar with the bible.
That is to say, as one gives religion a place in ones life for genuine reasons (ie not to virtue signaling or cultural appropriation or claiming patriarchs) they are automatically shaped and changed by its contents. And elaborating and giving takes on the bible then becomes easy and effortless.
So the mettle of people who profess to belong to different faiths is always going to recognized. Might as well not post if you're not the real deal.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote: Did the hunter-gatherers of Anatolia have an epiphany and beget the earliest farmers, or were they somebody else entirely?
About 10,000 years ago, the story of humanity reached a turning point, transiting from a life of hunting and gathering to subsistence agriculture and animal husbandry (with some hunting and gathering).
This transition – the “Neolithic revolution” – appeared at different times in different parts of the world (and never even reached Australia, where farming really only began in the 19th century). Agriculture and animal husbandry apparently developed independently in different areas during the Holocene. But leaving China out of it, one of the very first places agriculture and the practice of breeding captive herbivores emerged was the region of Anatolia-Mesopotamia.
The Neolithic revolution changed the trajectory of the human story. The question is: who exactly were the early farmers of Anatolia? Were they locals living there from time immemorial who developed a new lifestyle? Invaders? Something else? All of the above?
Now, analysis of ancient DNA samples from all over the Near East sheds light on that conundrum, report Drs. Iosif Lazaridis, Songül Alpaslan-Roodenberg, Ron Pinhasi and David Reich of Harvard University, and a giant international team, in Science. The early farmers were not pure locals. There were two pulses of migration into Anatolia during the early Neolithic.
The first had already occurred by the Pre-Pottery Neolithic period, about 11,000 to 9,000 years ago. It originated in northern Mesopotamia.
“The Mesopotamian admixture is present in all Pre-Pottery Neolithic Anatolians we sampled, but not in an Epipaleolithic individual from Pinarbasi in Anatolia from about 15,500 years ago (which is the one hunter-gatherer data point from Anatolia),” Reich clarifies.
The second migration into early Neolithic Anatolia distinguishes all the Anatolian farmers from the Pottery Neolithic period that began about 9,000 ago from those that preceded them. The source was the Levant, Lazaridis explains.
In other words, the incomers didn’t supplant or extinguish the locals; they admixed. Thus, the early farmers of Anatolia have three distinct deep hunter-gatherer ancestries: Anatolian, Mesopotamian and Levantine, Lazaridis sums up.
Actually, all the sampled Neolithic populations throughout Middle East are a mixture of these three deep sources, Lazaridis says.
“It’s probably more complicated,” Reich qualifies. But for the nonce, we can describe the early farmers of Anatolia as mixes, in different proportions, of these three source populations.
One challenge with studying our origins is the paucity of material. One might think Africa and Eurasia are littered with human remains from our entire evolutionary history, but they aren’t. Even after deep burial emerged, as opposed to shallow burials vulnerable to hyenas, no burial at all or cremation, precious little is preserved over time. Altogether, the paper is based on genomic analysis of just 100 ancient individuals: 42 individuals with new data, and 48 previously published.
From Israel, for example, the team analyzed DNA from two groups: six pre-Neolithic Natufians from about 13,000 years ago, and two Pre-Pottery Neolithic people from about 9,000 years ago. The Cyprus data, which is the first ever reported from this island, was based on the fragmentary remains of three folk who, about 10,000 years ago, were apparently tossed down a well. Tsk tsk.
From Anatolia, the study analyzes 49 individuals – including three newly reported individuals from the Pre-Pottery Neolithic site of Boncuklu Tarla in Mardin, southeast Turkey. Along with two individuals from Nemrik in Iraq dating to a similar time, these represent the first ancient DNA data ever reported from Mesopotamia.
The study also reports two individuals from Armenia who lived around 8,000 years ago – the first Neolithic data from the Armenian plateau – and several more from the previously unsampled northern Zagros mountain range from Iraq’s Shanidar and Bestansur caves.
It would be nice to have more samples but such is life – the sheer number of reports based on analyses of ancient genomes tends to obscure the extraordinary difficulty of the technique.
But the samples sufficed to deduce that before the Neolithic, there were distinct hunter-gatherer populations in Anatolia, Mesopotamia (the Caucasus) and the Levant. Come the Neolithic, the people had become mixes, with varying proportions of the three sources in different places, Reich and Lazaridis explain.
Put otherwise, none of these populations – not in Anatolia or in the Levant or southern Mesopotamia – descended from just one of these three sources, Lazaridis stresses. But the Neolithic people of the Levant have more Natufian than other sources, for example.
All this is from the team’s analysis of ancient DNA. There is also some concrete evidence of contact between these peoples, such as an obsidian blade from Anatolia found in Motza (by Jerusalem) in a 9,000-year-old village, and another found in prehistoric Saudi Arabia. Of course, these blades don’t necessarily attest to direct relations; they could have changed hands over generations as they slowly wound their way from Turkey to Israel and Arabia.
That Neolithic village in Motza is also where one of the two Levantine samples in this study was from; the other was from Kfar Horesh. Both were from the Pre-Pottery period and genetically they seem almost identical to the parallel population in ‘Ain Ghazal in Amman, Jordan, Reich adds.
How large were these two pulses of migration? We have no idea, but they weren’t a trickle. The mixes are showing up as 30 percent, 40 percent, 50 percent – which suggests much movement, the researchers explain. But they can’t say whether these were “sudden” processes over just a few generations, or a protracted process of exchanges over millennia, Reich says. There just isn’t enough data at this point.
“With richer sampling, we’d begin to learn this. In Britain we have tons of sampling and can pinpoint population change to a few centuries, but we don’t have that here,” he adds.
One wonders at the scantiness of information from Israel, which sometimes seems to have more archaeologists than people.
“Israel is the place in the Near East with the richest data and the archaeology is incredible,” Reich responds. But so far, most attempts to retrieve DNA from skeletal remains in Israel have been frustrating – as said, the technique is a monster, conditions in Israel aren’t necessarily conducive to adequate preservation of DNA in ancient bones, and thus managing to extract DNA from Natufian remains at Rakefet Cave was practically a miracle. However, the technology is improving, Reich says.
Meanwhile, Lazaridis points out that they don’t have data on the Pottery Neolithic period from the Levant (8,000 to 9,000 years ago), so can’t be confident the migration was bidirectional.
Come the Chalcolithic (the Copper Age), there is a “beautiful set of 22 samples” from northern Israel’s Peki’in cave, with extra Anatolian ancestry, Reich says. One site with evidence of Anatolian ancestry in northern Israel 6,000 years ago does not a mass movement make, but it’s intriguing.
Then there’s a gap in the genetic information on the peopling of the Levant from about 6,000 to 4,000 years ago, Lazaridis notes. Not surprisingly, they have no data from any period from Syria or Lebanon.
What the new information can’t do is shed light on the rise and fall of the people who brought us Göbekli Tepe, Karahan Tepe and altogether 16 sites (discovered so far) in prehistoric Turkey. The thinking now is their construction began about 12,000 years ago, by pre-Neolithic hunter-gatherers, definitely not early farmers, says Prof. Necmi Karul of Istanbul University.
These hunter-gatherers were not living in small nomadic groups: they had villages and built great monuments that some call “the earliest temples in the world,” and that Karul prefers to call “gathering places.” After about 1,500 years, that culture seems to have disappeared. But there are no pre-Neolithic samples from that area and only one from Anatolia (that person from Pinarbasi who lived about 15,000 years ago), Lazaridis says. At this point, they can’t answer the question of continuity between pre-Neolithic and Neolithic populations in that part of the world.
Also, as Reich points out, Göbekli wasn’t a burial site. “These burials are scarce, especially in the hunter-gatherer period. It’s the rare region where there is a cemetery or cave context. We have every hope of getting such data in future, but for now we don’t have it,” he says.
What we do have is a better picture of the early farmers in the Near East: they were a mix, not pure descendants of local hunter-gatherers, insofar as that could be tested. Where the Levant component originated is not clear; the southern Levant – say, Jordan or Israel, or perhaps Syria – from where there is no data, but where there had been a rich Pottery-period Neolithic culture.
The team adds some caveats about using the word “migration.” When talking about “migration pulses,” it likely wasn’t intentional; likely no master plan of conquest was involved; the dimensions are unclear. As they say, there aren’t many samples, but a pattern is a pattern – and Homo genus seems to have had wanderlust since we had feet.
So what, are we to take these 3 admixed groups as Japheth, Shem, and Ham?? LOL
But the Anatolian connection is no surprise since that is said to be a source of hg J.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here is a snapshot from Upper Mesopotamia from the time period c. 8500 to 7500 cal BCE.
One can notice that the Y-DNA haplogroup J2a1a is present at the site.
quote:Abstract Upper Mesopotamia played a key role in the Neolithic Transition in Southwest Asia through marked innovations in symbolism, technology, and diet. We present 13 ancient genomes (c. 8500 to 7500 cal BCE) from Pre-Pottery Neolithic Çayönü in the Tigris basin together with bioarchaeological and material culture data. Our findings reveal that Çayönü was a genetically diverse population, carrying mixed ancestry from western and eastern Fertile Crescent, and that the community received immigrants. Our results further suggest that the community was organized along biological family lines. We document bodily interventions such as head shaping and cauterization among the individuals examined, reflecting Çayönü’s cultural ingenuity. Last, we identify Upper Mesopotamia as the likely source of eastern gene flow into Neolithic Anatolia, in line with material culture evidence. We hypothesize that Upper Mesopotamia’s cultural dynamism during the Neolithic Transition was the product not only of its fertile lands but also of its interregional demographic connections.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
@Swenet
Look at you, lying about what I said again. You already got caught blatantly lying when you said I claimed that "J carriers adopted the natufian language/cultufe in the bronze age Levant".
Lmao.
Anyone who was actually reading what I said will know that I never accused anybody of ignoring the supposed E markers in the akkadians, I said they were "trying to make it irrelevant". That's word for word what I said. If someone is trying to make something irrelevant, that logically means they have seen the information in question and are trying to diminish it's importance.
Secondly, when I mentioned akkadians reportedly having E, I was talking about in the context of this thread. I've never seen that thread you just linked. Am I supposed to brief myself on every thread on this website? I can't "fail to attribute" something to someone if I had no idea they'd ever talked about it before. Surely a genius like yourself would not be ignorant of something like this, right?
Posts: 2493 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
@Djehuti
You are aware of the fact that Jacob's two other wives (Zilpah and Bilhah) were slaves/handmaids of Jacob's original wives Leah and Rachel, right? And they became Jacob's concubines. The Hebrews had a tradition and custom where they did not enslave each other. Are you suggesting that Rachel and Leah enslaved their own people and made them slaves/handmaids? And that Jacob took fellow Hebrew women CONCUBINES?
Smh! If I am in a cult, we sure do know the Bible better than you do.
I've shown you a reputable Biblical source stating that the word "gentile" USUALLY means a non-Israelite people (not always) and I've also shown you literal examples in the Bible of Israelites being told they used to be gentiles (past tense) and other scriptures that literally identify the gentiles as Israelites and you had nothing to say about any of it except for "omg he thinks gentiles were Israelites".
Hey, you know your boy Paul was also accused of being in a "cult", right?
ACTS 24:14 NLT
"14 But I admit that I follow the Way, which they call a cult. I worship the God of our ancestors, and I firmly believe the Jewish law and everything written in the prophets." Posts: 2493 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
I'm just going to leave this here. Dr. Eran Elhak's website says that Israelite samples (yes, the same Israelites whose ancestor(s) came from Mesopotamia) have E1b1 and T1 markers.
Keep in mind, this is the same geneticist who wrote the peer-reviewed paper about natufians being the most likely Judaean progenitors -- the same paper that was published on the government website.
"...This is the only match from prehistoric times to date, but it is reasonable to expect many more to come as ancient DNA from Eastern Europe and the Caucasus will be sequenced. Interestingly, the Y chromosomal haplotypes of the ancient Israelites are typically E1b1 and T1 haplotypes, commonly found today in Africa with lower frequencies in the Middle East and Europe."
And from the look of things, he doesn't seem to have a problem dialoguing with "cult members" and explaining how he came to his conclusions. So he would certainly be willing to discuss with one of you. Maybe one of you experts are willing to have a discussion with him and let him know how wrong he is, or at least ask him some questions?
**** Also, in this short 2 minute clip, Razib Khan mentions natufians and states that E markers had high frequences in ancient Arabians, Syrians and Israelites (yes, the same Israelites whose ancestor(s) came from Mesopotamia.)
* Although I will make a disclaimer: he was asked specifically about E1b1a, but at the end of the clip he clarified and made it more clear that he was talking about E in general and not any specific clade.
Why are all of these well established doctorates/scholars and professionals in the genetics community saying that Israelites had E markers? Maybe because they have access to information that nobody on here does? Maybe because it's the truth?
Is ANYONE here willing to discuss this with any of the above mentioned scholars instead of attacking me for simply referencing the information they share and publish? I am eager to see which one of you are willing to tell these professionals that they are wrong and attack them the same way you attack me.
LET ME KNOW if any of you want to set up a LIVE discussion/dialogue with one of these professionals instead of typing back and forth everyday on Egypt Search. No need to even mention me anymore, let's see you go after some actual Ph.Ds and well known scholars/professionals who possess authority in the professional genetics community.
Posts: 2493 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
Look at you, lying about what I said again. You already got caught blatantly lying and saying that I asserted that "J carriers adopted the natufian language/cultufe in the bronze age Levant".
Lmao.
Anyone who was actually reading what I said will know that I never accused anybody of ignoring the supposed E markers in the akkadians, I said they were "trying to make it irrelevant". That's word for word what I said. If someone is trying to make something irrelevant, that logically means they have seen the information in question and are trying to diminish it's importance.
Secondly, when I mentioned akkadians reportedly having E, I was talking about in the context of this thread. I've never seen that thread you just linked. Am I supposed to brief myself on every thread on this website? I can't "fail to attribute" something to someone if I had no idea they'd ever talked about it before. Surely a genius like yourself would not be ignorant of something like this, right?
The funny part is that Lioness is sometimes feeding into Tazarah's bs, trying to make it seem like there is some kind of "method" to his posts, that people are misrepresenting. And that you have to debate Tazarah "the right way" because there is some method to his insanity.
There is no method or any kind of consistency to Tazarah's posts. When he's talking about Y-DNA E, and you respond to that, he's liable to flip flop AT ANY moment and tell you he doesn't subscribe to genetics or that he's not interested in claiming Y-DNA E in Natufians or that Hebrews weren't 'Africans'. He's done this several times throughout this thread, with several different arguments.
The latest bait and switch is this new angle where Mesopotamians had Y-DNA E all along, even though he's been arguing for several thread pages that Y-DNA J people were supposedly new to Proto-Semitic culture until they adopted it in the Levant. How can they be new to it, if Proto-Semitic speakers already existed in Mesopotamia, as attested by the LD signal in Armenians?
Look at this new conman angle that Tazarah started adopting after being educated on the true distribution of Proto-Semitic (mostly not in the Levant, but to the east), which he's calling me a liar for pointing out:
It's crazy how the few people in here who repeatedly say "but J came from Mesopotamia just like how the Bible says Abraham did" don't reference or mention ANY information about how actual Mesopotamian civilizations were believed to have had E markers... are y'all trying to bamboozle people or what? --New conman angle, a blatant plagiarism now repackaged as "I knews it all along"
Here we have the conman misattributing his source as being Horvath, when his source was Egyptsearch. The same posts he was pushing back against, he's repackaging now as something he learned own his own and that people are trying to bamboozle him.
"The most plausible candidates for Semitic re-migration to the Fertile Crescent with TMRCA-s fitting the arrival of the Akkadians and other early Semitic peoples are certain subclades of both E-V22 and E-V12 with relatively early TMRCA-s present in the middle east could be candidates for such re-migration, such as E-FGC14382 (TMRCA 2200 BCE), E-V3262 (TMRCA 2600 BCE).
SOURCE: "How Eurasia Was Born" HOW EURASIA WAS BORN -A Provisional Atlas of prehistoric Eurasia based on genetic data supporting the farming-language dispersal model- CSABA-BARNABÁS HORVÁTH --New conman angle
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
@Swenet
Again, where did I say anyone was ignoring information that I posted about reported E markers in akkadians? That is literally what you just accused me of saying. Yet all I said is that people were trying to make it irrelevant.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: He actually said that "everyone was ignoring Y-DNA E from Mesopotamia" that he only posted in the last couple of thread pages...
And even in the quote of mine that you just posted in your previous commenrt, I wasn't accusing anyone of ignoring any information I posted about akkadians. That quote is from the FIRST post I made about akkadians reportedly having E markers. So how in the hell could anybody be ignoring it if I hadn't even posted it yet?
Get it together man. Your comments are not even worth addressing in full. Let me know if you are interested in setting up a live dialogue with some actual professionals, since all the information I've referenced is wrong.
Posts: 2493 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Here we have the conman misattributing his source as being Horvath, when his source was Egyptsearch. The same posts he was pushing back against, he's repackaging now as something he learned own his own and that people are trying to bamboozle him. [Roll Eyes]
"The most plausible candidates for Semitic re-migration to the Fertile Crescent with TMRCA-s fitting the arrival of the Akkadians and other early Semitic peoples are certain subclades of both E-V22 and E-V12 with relatively early TMRCA-s present in the middle east could be candidates for such re-migration, such as E-FGC14382 (TMRCA 2200 BCE), E-V3262 (TMRCA 2600 BCE).
SOURCE: "How Eurasia Was Born" HOW EURASIA WAS BORN -A Provisional Atlas of prehistoric Eurasia based on genetic data supporting the farming-language dispersal model- CSABA-BARNABÁS HORVÁTH
Swenet is so ignorant, he honestly thinks there aren't any other places on the internet that share sources or discuss genetics. I just MUST have gotten it from egyptsearch. You stay trying to make me look bad but it always horribly backfires on you.
^^^ video is from over a year ago but the person uses the source in previous, older videos as well.
Posts: 2493 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't care if Todd from Arkansas used the quote 10 years ago.
Where did YOU use it in this thread when you were trying to claim Y-DNA J "still had nothing to do with afro-asiatic culture until J came and adopted the customs."
Either E was in Mesopotamia all along, and surrounding populations were well acquainted with Afroasiatic people, or Y-DNA J people learned it on arrival in the Levant, from "Natufian progenitors". Which is it?
Watch for more bs and cries about being misrepresented in 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
@Swenet
Bruh, you just lied (again) and said I got the source from Egyptsearch. And you tried to attack my character/integrity based on that false statement. There is no escaping the proven fact that you constantly lie on me. Now you're trying to tap dance.
I'm done playing games with you. Let me know if you are willing to set up a live discussion with one of the genetic professionals I mentioned above who both say Israelites had E. Instead of attacking me for simply referencing them.
Otherwise there is nothing left for us to talk about.
Posts: 2493 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ur Kasdim (Hebrew), commonly translated as Ur of the Chaldeans, is a city mentioned in the Hebrew Bible as the birthplace of Abraham, the patriarch of the Israelites and the Ishmaelites. In 1862, Henry Rawlinson identified Ur;dim with Tell el-Muqayyar, near Nasiriyah in Baghdad Eyalet (which is located in modern-day Iraq).[1] In 1927, Leonard Woolley excavated the site and identified it as a Sumerian archaeological site where the Chaldeans were to settle around the 9th century BC.[2] Recent archaeology work has continued to focus on the location in Nasiriyah, where the ancient Ziggurat of Ur is located
-------------------- It's not my burden to disabuse the ignorant of their wrong opinions Posts: 2699 | From: New York | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wow. This dude literally said he doesn't know anything about Akkadians on the 3rd of November. Akkadians played no role in his argument.
quote:Posted by Tazarah (Member # 23365) on 03 November, 2023 11:58:
@Elmaestro
I haven't really done any research into the akkadians and know little to nothing about them, but from my POV if they were actual Semites then they would be descendants of Noah, through his son Shem (the progenitor of the semites)
Not sure if that answers your question, but I don't really know much about them other than the fact that they had an empire of Mesopotamia
In between the 3rd of November and the 10th of November, something obviously changed, but he's really trying to sit here and tell us it didn't come from ES, and doesn't represent a complete change in his argument, effectively making "Natufian progenitors" obsolete:
quote:Posted by Tazarah (Member # 23365) on 10 November, 2023 11:15: It's crazy how the few people in here who repeatedly say "but J came from Mesopotamia just like how the Bible says Abraham did" don't reference or mention ANY information about how actual Mesopotamian civilizations were believed to have had E markers... are y'all trying to bamboozle people or what?
"The most plausible candidates for Semitic re-migration to the Fertile Crescent with TMRCA-s fitting the arrival of the Akkadians and other early Semitic peoples are certain subclades of both E-V22 and E-V12 with relatively early TMRCA-s present in the middle east could be candidates for such re-migration, such as E-FGC14382 (TMRCA 2200 BCE), E-V3262 (TMRCA 2600 BCE).
Wow.
You can literally see the change as he's being schooled on ES:
quote:Posted by Tazarah (Member # 23365) on 03 November, 2023 11:58: I haven't really done any research into the akkadians and know little to nothing about them, but from my POV if they were actual Semites then they would be descendants of Noah, through his son Shem (the progenitor of the semites)
quote:Posted by Tazarah (Member # 23365) on 13 November, 2023 10:28: First of all, Lisa already pointed out earlier in the thread that Accad (Akkadians) descend from Ham's son Cush. So of course they were not descendants of Shem. And I myself already knew this as well.
The part where he says "and I myself knew this as well", even as he's clearly plagiarizing in real-time, is crazy. Dude literally vacated his position, set up shop elsewhere, refuses to acknowledge it, then turns around and tells us we're trying to bamboozle him, even as he's posting information he got from this site .
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
^ I literally referenced the YouTube channel that I got the akkadian source from. I even showed you the exact video and time stamp. ALL of the genetic sources I share come from there; feel free to look through the videos on the channel for yourself.
Secondly, (for the last time) I never accused anybody of ignoring any information that I posted akkadians (which is word for word what you accused me of).
The quote of mine that you keep posting does not match up with what you are accusing me of, because you are a liar.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: He actually said that "everyone was ignoring Y-DNA E from Mesopotamia" that he only posted in the last couple of thread pages...
Also, please quote me saying that akkadians were the progenitors of Israelites, and thus nullifying the natufian progenitor source/argument. That is also something else that I never said, I was just using that source to demonstrate E being in Mesopotamia. Let's see if we can add another lie to your resume.
You've been caught lying on me so many times, you're now trying to go back and cherrypick select parts of my comments in hopes of convincing yourself that I'm somehow lying about something.
When Elmaestro mentioned the Akkadians, it did not register that they were "Accad" in the Bible until I did some quick looking into them, then shortly after my memory was refreshed, Lisa posted the scripture about them descending from Accad.
They are not called "Akkadians" in the bible, genius. If demonstrating that I had a lapse of memory concerning who the Akkadians were is the best and most damning evidence you have against me then I don't know what to tell you.
Imagine putting all this time, energy and effort into going back and forth with someone you view as a "con man".
I will pray for you my brother.
Let me know if you are willing to set up a live discussion with any of the genetic professionals I mentioned above, they both say Israelites had E markers. Is it safe to say at this point that you are not willing?
Posts: 2493 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
.
Posts: 2493 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote: Originally posted by Tazarah: I never said this. You always accuse me of saying/believing things I've never said.
quote:Originally posted by Tazarah: @BrandonP
Actually Brandon, you are correct this time. My apologies.
You've falsely accused people of misrepresenting you, several times. Who cares about your attempts at damage control? YOU don't even know what you're talking about anymore.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
@Swenet
Damage control? Nothing I've said contradicts anything else I've said, and Brandon had misrepresented me in a previous comment (even the lioness pointed this out) and he also admit it himself, but the second time he was actually right and you know what I did? I admit I was wrong and apologized.
Have you ever apologized for lying on me, whether it was intentional or not?.... nope.
Damage control is what you are doing right now -- trying to avoid the fact that you are lying about where I get my sources from and how I "accused everyone of ignoring the akkadian source I posted" when I never did.
Or when you lied and said I claimed J carriers met natufians in the bronze age Levant and adopted their customs.
Are you willing to have a live discussion with either of the genetic professionals I've referenced that both say Israelites had E markers? Yes or no? You can even type an email and I'll have it forwarded to them, you can tell them how wrong they are and we can all look at their response afterward.
Are you willing to dialogue/discuss Israelites having E markers with a genetic professional in any form or fashion? Yes or no?
Posts: 2493 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
Please respond yes or no to the comment I just made. Anything else you say will be ignored and I will let you have the last word because I'm not in the business of going back and forth with irrational individuals (although I used to be).
Elmaestro is 100% correct when he said that this thread is getting flooded with unecessary posts/comments.
Posts: 2493 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
Experts, with more authority, credentials and experience than you.
Even Elmaestro asserted or implied that akkadians had E markers, but that they had nothing to do with Hebrews or Israelites since the akkadians would be descendants of Noah's grandson Cush. But what that ended up also demonstrating is that Noah's most recent descendants were believed to have E markers, which would logically entail that Shem did as well as Noah himself.
IF we follow genetic methodology.
SOURCE: "How Eurasia Was Born" HOW EURASIA WAS BORN -A Provisional Atlas of prehistoric Eurasia based on genetic data supporting the farming-language dispersal model- CSABA-BARNABÁS HORVÁTH
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
@the lioness,
The same paper postulates that akkadians (recent descendants of Noah) had E markers.
Posts: 2493 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
The same paper postulates that akkadians (recent descendants of Noah) had E markers.
It's not a journal article with a team of researchers testing anything, It's one historian postulating (guessing) in a overview of the history of Eurasia in an obscure Hungarian International relations publication. Also it is dubious that it is known if Abraham came from somewhere east of Israel that his ancestry was specifically Akkadian or that Akkadians were all E bearers, so stop pretending these postulations are facts, thanks
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
@Tazarah, have you heard Nathanyel, Yahanna or any of these 1 West camps talk about the implications of Genesis 11:28-31, 15:7 or Nehemiah 9:7 The only one I hear touching on these this is Zion Lexx and his Sumerian Hebrew thing
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
@the lioness,
He's not just a historian. But you also just referenced the paper so I thought I would point out what it says about E. I never claimed he had akkadian ancestry... the only reason I appealed to akkadians was to demonstrate E in Mesopotamia. Dr. Elhaik claims Abraham was E1b
What specifically do you want to know about those scriptures?
I'm probably about to stop posting in this thread because I don't want to risk getting censored and having my comments deleted.
Posts: 2493 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
Topic Closed
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
.
Printer-friendly view of this topic