posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tazarah:
I agree, and there was also a recent study that came out about 2 years ago I think. It concluded that professional geniticists do this as well. They use an extremely flawed method to make the data say and represent what they want it to (and the crazy part is that they all know this.) Up to 215,000 genetic papers were supposedly affected.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tazarah:

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....

I'm literally offering the opportunity for you or anyone else to have a discussion with actual geneticists and/or professionals from the genetics community who do say it's true

---

Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
We all believe that DNA analysis is legitimate but you don't
So what are you even doing here?

If you think genetics is bullshit that should be your ongoing position, not saying that and then trying to present it like it's not bullshit, stop the flim flam

---

Posts: 2493 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

https://youtu.be/ijFJq2TSEhk?si=dscdAGrfJJ8-QlRF

39,856 views in about 4 months on a Hebrew Israelite youtube channel, soft selling test kits from a private company this geneticist works for in the guise of a discussion

what if 2% of the viewers bought one of the test kits based on watching the video?

39,856 X 2% = 797+

797 buyers, suppose they bought just one tribe test for $119.99

797 X $119.99 = $95,632

or 1% = $47, 816

lots of money potential for this disguised infomercial

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tazarah:
I agree, and there was also a recent study that came out about 2 years ago I think. It concluded that professional geneticists do this as well. They use an extremely flawed method to make the data say and represent what they want it to (and the crazy part is that they all know this.) Up to 215,000 genetic papers were supposedly affected.

---

quote:

---

Video.."just imagine just for the sake of arguments the more you're
releasing all the the the the the the the skeletons that you collected in Jerusalem and they're all coming up E1B1"

---

Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

It's hard to take the work of bloggers and laymen who run data from genetic studies into through genetic calculator programs, serious when they have no archaeology, linguistic, nor bio-anthropological data to back it up. Those computer programs spit out results as they try to twist the other disciplines to suit the genetic results. Genetics isn't the tell all that people make it out to be.

---

Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

The following timeline documents interactions between Eran Elhaik, some of the contributors to this website and various academic colleagues. This page is a work in progress and we welcome any additions and corrections.

---

Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

There are several reasons for this. Firstly, well-preserved DNA is harder to find in the hot Middle Eastern climes. But this technical issue was partly overcome by the 2015 discovery that the petrous bone, a part of the skull located behind the ear, contains a much higher concentration of DNA than other bones, meaning that at least some genetic material may survive in it even in warmer weather.

That game-changing revelation allowed scientists to shed light on everything from the genetic history of the earliest Neolithic farmers in Anatolia to the origins of the Philistines, the biblical enemies of the Israelites. But not much headway had been made on the ancient Hebrews.


That has been partly because of the rarity of ancient Hebrew graves and largely because in Judaism, excavating or disturbing graves is a big taboo. Particularly in Israel, human remains are not considered antiquities by law, and archaeologists who find ancient graves are often pressured by ultra-Orthodox groups to quickly rebury any bones they unearth.

---

Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
It seems Eran Elhaik is a somewhat controversial person and his results and theories are sometimes contested by other researchers.

---

Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Elijah The Tishbite:

It's hard to take the work of bloggers and laymen who run data from genetic studies into through genetic calculator programs, serious when they have no archaeology, linguistic, nor bio-anthropological data to back it up. Those computer programs spit out results as they try to twist the other disciplines to suit the genetic results. Genetics isn't the tell all that people make it out to be.

---

That is an understatement. The problem is that these Euronuts are running wild posting these genetic distance calculations without any context. It is a fact that how different populations are related to each other depends on both their time of divergence from most recent common ancestors and the amount of geneflow that occurs between them i.e. interbreeding. This is why different Eurasian populations relate to each other differently, but the same is especially true of Africans who being the oldest human populations have the greatest genetic diversity due to number of population divergences within the continent. So what the Eurocentric-racists do is pigeonhole populations in Africa and then attempt to racialize these populations by for example, identifying the common Sub-Saharan autosomal IBD marker with "true negroid" morphology while identifying the ENF/Natufian marker that is allegedly "Eurasian" with caucasoid morphology. This is the exact modus-operandum that the troll Antalas uses. But this type of approach is fallacious and was debunked years ago by the likes of Ethiohelix in his article here: Human Genetic Diversity ≠ Discrete or Pure Races

Some of these ancestral populations were possibly even as distinct from each other as the San are from modern West-Central Africans *(time divergence appears greater than the time-divergence between West-Central Africans and the Han-Chinese, and genetic drift (based on Fst) is comparable to the drift between the Han-Chinese and the English)*.

Groups that would count as "Negroids" within Africa should also not be seen as some sort of genetic monolith. They're not... And even the old racialist model didn't truly imply as much. There's often a West-Central African cluster ("Niger-Congo" above) and an East African-cluster ("Nilo-Saharan" above) in ADMIXTURE runs, for instance. The Fst between these two clusters, as an example, is a little over 1/2 the Fst between the East Asian and European clusters above.

Also, based on Haplotypic data, the time divergence between some of these "African" ancestries (i.e. the African elements in Somalis and the African elements in Yorubas) implies they possibly haven't shared ancestry in over 30,000-40,000 years or so which is comparable to the, so far, supposed time-divergence between ENAs and the ancestors of European Hunter-Gatherers.

This is how Euronuts are able to misrepresent accurate results from their genetic distance runs with not just Egyptians but even Nubians like with the Bronze Age Pre-Kerma sample from Kadruka.



but then



Which means Germans are as genetically closer to modern day Nubians than are south Sudanese or West Africans. Which then begs the question why? What could pool black Nubians of North Africa with white Germans of Europe or rather Western Eurasia? Again from Ethiohelix:

Instead, none of these West Eurasian populations are separate/discrete races from one another. They in fact share very recent ancestry from, for now, what look to be three or so core pre-historic populations. Villabruna-related West Eurasian Hunter-Gatherers (VHGs a.k.a "WHGs"), Ancient North Eurasian-related peoples (ANEs) *and the theoretical "Basal Eurasians"*.

They are, in large part, the product of admixture and not simply genetic drift where there was a Population X and then Populations Y and Z descend from it, were separate for a long time, then developed different mutations that altered the genotypes and phenotypes of a few of them, and then went through natural selection and genetic drift to select for those traits and become distinct entities.

Note the 3rd core ancestry of West Eurasians being "Basal Eurasian" which many geneticists are seriously considering to be of African origin. Swenet made note of the skeletal evidence of this in his blog article Why Basal Eurasian is Still African as of Lazaridis et al 2016. There he points out traits that are African even "negroid" in many Mesolithic to Neolithic remains including EEF skeletons in Europe even Germany such as Stuttgart and Muhlhausen.

Brace's 2005 map
"These non metric attributes all support the view that most of the Neolithic inhabitants of Europe tie more closely together with each other than with the living representatives of the areas in question. The principal exception to this generalization is [...] the Muhlhausen sample, which ties closer metrically to the living inhabitants of the Middle East and North Africa."

The excerpt above describes the North Africa-affiliated "Muhlhausen" LBK sample [Brace et al 2005]. This is the exact same sample Lazaridis et al 2013 would turn to almost ten years later, to sample the now infamous "Basal Eurasian" carrier—Stuttgart. But those who've convinced themselves that the Stuttgart individual is merely an odd looking individual in an otherwise perfectly European looking population, are in for a big surprise.

Which means Germans have African admixture from the Neolithic!

Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Antalas:

I would have no problem with "white" if it's restricted to Europeans since most of them form a coherent and homogeneous cluster. The same way I have no problem with "black" if it's restricted to Africans with no or negligible amount of Eurasian ancestry.

---

Yet the labels "white" and "black" are based on color or physical appearance NOT ancestry.

Which is why Antalas's people who despite being Africans are considered 'white' because of the way they look.




Although they are found in coastal Northwestern Africa and skeletally and genetically are an extension of Europeans despite their African admixture.

Meanwhile you have 100% Eurasians with NO recent African ancestry who look like the following.







So these people are somehow not 'black'?! LOL

But to the point...

quote:

---

As for Ethiopians, I did not lie :

Here you can see Afar are closer to Italians than west Africans (even closer to French):




Same for Tigray:




or Amhara:




Let's not even talk about how close they are to Berbers like me than west/central or east Africans.

---

Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged |