posted
Mota man travels to Mexico?- Pre-historic Africans in Mexico-The smoking gun found!
It is astonishing how these people lie and manipulate the data to align with their narrative.
1. Is there a difference between Eurasian and European DNA Now there are European, Eurasian and Asian haplogroups Tsk! Tsk! 2. They have classified E1b1b as European haplogroup 3. They have classified R-V88 as European and not African 4. I have to assume they screwed up big time. It is impossible for R-V88 to be so prolific in Mexico unless they arrived 1000’s of years before Europeans. All of these are Africans lineages 5. In a previous analysis I mentioned that if these Native American “Lumvee?” carried R-V88 (asked Tukuler to look into it)and not R1b-M269 then all we have been told about Christopher Columbus and European discovery is a lie. Well I hope the y-DNA is wrong on R-V88 because this changes EVERYTHING!!!
I have said this for some time now. Was there Africans in the America’s BEFORE supposed West Europeans presence in the 1600’s? I have also speculated that Christopher Columbus never existed or at least he is a composite character.
I was on the fence when it came to modern West Africans presence in the Americas ….. pre Columbus. As the genetic data come out I strongly believe that is/was the case. African were present in the Americas pre-1600’s.
Here is the latest paper. But I am baffled by how they got here. Just as I don’t believe Indonesian women rowed in canoes 4000miles of open Ocean to reach Madagascar I don’t believe West African men sailed 4000miles across the Atlantic Ocean to reach Mexico or the Americas.
I am beginning to believe incredible as it may sound that we were lied to(not surprising), and that the geographic landscape of the earth was different compared to today. The Oceans and land connections were much different to what we were taught. It is impossible for Indonesian women to sail across the Indian Ocean…and survive open seas.
The astonishing thing is the lineage for “African” y-Str in Mexico is E1b1a-V38. Mota travelled to Mexico? When?
It is irritating that these “research” politicians do not do a deep dive. They throw things out there and walk away. Blind speculation. What is education coming to these days.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
“Distribution of paternal lineages in Mestizo populations throughout Mexico: an in silico study based on Y-STR haplotypes” -J. A. Aguilar-Velázquez
Abstract The Mexican-Mestizo population arose following European contact with the Americas due to the admixture of principally Spaniards, Native Americans, and Africans around 500 years ago. Because the paternal lineage distribution of the Mexican population has been poorly investigated, this study inferred the haplogroups of ten populations based on 1859 haplotypes (Y-STR data) using two haplogroup predictor programs. In the Mexican population sample, we found predominantly European ancestry (50.1%), followed by Native American (32.5%), Eurasian (13.4%),??????? African (2.1%), East African-South Eurasian (1.3%), and Asian (0.6%) ancestries. In general, our results support a contrary north-to-south gradient throughout the Mexican territory of European and Native-American ancestries, respectively. Moreover, the presence of West-European R1b and Sub-Saharan African E1b1a haplogroups agrees with historical and genetic data of gene flow during the European conquest. This study represents the effort to analyze these paternal lineages on a large scale by taking advantage of Y-STR haplotype data to determine the distribution and ancestry proportions in this country.
Introduction The past 500 years of admixture among Europeans (primarily Spaniards), Native-Americans, and Africans have formed the majority of the contemporary Mestizo (admixed) population from Mexico (~93%). The National Institute of Anthropology defines a Mestizo as a person born in Mexico who has a Spanish-derived last name and a family with Mexican ancestors who can be traced back to the third generation [1]. The specific sets of single nucleotide polymorphisms of the Y-chromosome (Y-SNPs) are known as Y-linked haplogroups and constitute paternal lineages related by descent, which enable the definition of the paternal ancestry of individuals and populations.
But more astonishing is the E1b1a-V38. These are not West African slaves. Isn’t this Mota? E-V38 is virtually non-existence in West Africa.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would like to see a comparative mtDNA study from the same population.
Keeping in mind they used I assumed is a sophisticated predictor to ID the yDNA haplogroup. These haplogroups are accurate…right?
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
Quote: “Y-haplogroup prediction was performed on the basis of Y-STR loci information using two different predictor algorithms: (1) Whit Athey’s Haplogroup Predictor (HPRG-HAPEST) [4] with equal prior metapopulation and (2) the Nevgen Y-DNA Haplogroup Predictor [5]. Both approaches assign a probability of haplogroup affiliation for a given Y-STR haplotype, and the assigned Y-linked haplogroup is the one with the highest probability value. The choice of these two predictors was based on the fact that they have previously produced the best prediction results [3, 14]. It has been demonstrated that when at least 20 Y-STRs are used, the prediction probability for the correct Y-haplogroup can be higher than 99% in nearly all cases [15]. Therefore, all population datasets included in this work are constituted by 17 Y-STRs, excepting Jalisco and Mexico City, which were based on 15 and 23 Y-STR loci, respectively.”
I will wager a bet. All the R1b in Cape Verde are ….you guessed it …R1b-V88. Where is Capra when you need someone to beat up on!! Ha! Ha! Fugking Portguese gigolo’s my ass.
All the R1b in Brazil will also be R1b-V88.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Xyyman wrote: (asked Tukuler to look into it)
Sorry nothing to report. I not one youze guyz what can track down and pace data independently of the Big Boys. If I was running my own little lab I'd be a busy working on a run set including Mt Hora among the other recently extracted African aDNA.
posted
Amazing. That to the EAst the ancestral and older lineage is found and not to the west(West Africa).
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by xyyman:
E-V38 is virtually non-existence in West Africa.
have you lost your mind?
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
What does it all mean? Africans were probably in Africa LONG LONG before Columbus. But more astonishing is African R-V88 in Mexico!!!!! Even the E1b1b!!!!! These are very old African lineages keeping in mind E-M2 is relatively young.
I will like to know if the R1b in most Aframs are really R-V88 or R-m269?
@Lioness, it is impossible for that predominance of R-V88 to be in Mexico. IMPOSSIBLE!!!!! unless this is pre-historic. IMPOSSIBLE! ' Either they (researchers) made a mistake which they are certain they did not make a mistake or Africans were here BEFORE Columbus. Period!
Also amazing is R1b-M269 is NOT present in large frequency.
This COVID-19 plandemic has showed me how lies and misinformation can spread and the people can be duped.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: What does it all mean? Africans were probably in Africa LONG LONG before Columbus. But more astonishing is African R-V88 in Mexico!!!!! Even the E1b1b!!!!! These are very old African lineages keeping in mind E-M2 is relatively young.
I will like to know if the R1b in most Aframs are really R-V88 or R-m269?
@Lioness, it is impossible for that predominance of R-V88 to be in Mexico. IMPOSSIBLE!!!!! unless this is pre-historic. IMPOSSIBLE! ' Either they (researchers) made a mistake which they are certain they did not make a mistake or Africans were here BEFORE Columbus. Period!
Also amazing is R1b-M269 is NOT present in large frequency.
This COVID-19 plandemic has showed me how lies and misinformation can spread and the people can be duped.
.
It doesn't matter if its R1b-M269 or R1b-V88 both Y-Chromosome DNA originated in Africa.
I first published information on the African origin of R1 and its introduction to the Americas in my books and articles on Black Native Americans, the Kushites and haplogroup R-M173.
posted
I agree both R1b-M269 and V88 is of African origin. But that is not my contention. This paper, if the data holds up, is a bombshell. I am surprised it is not getting the play it deserves. This debunks the whole idea of Christopher Columbus, European Colonialization and even the extent of slavery. …This dataset proves that the majority of “African” lineage in the Americas are PRE-COLONIAL. The hilarious thing is the author, in order to save face and maintain the status quo, attributed R-V88 and E1b1b as “European”. This is fugking unbelievable. The audacity and psychosis of these people! Spinning African genes as “European”, skew things to make their point.
The question now is where the story of “African slaves” came from and to what extent was slavery? As I mentioned above the “lumvee”/Native American paper has the lineage about 40% R1b but it was not clear if it was R-V88. But the author in that paper speculated about European admixture in Native Americans. A lie!!!!! I mentioned to Tukuler that if someone did a deep dive this R1b could be really R-V88. And here now with the paper. Bada bing! These are NOT European R1b!
This proves African presence pre “Columbus”.
Man…WTF is going on? These results can NOT possibly be true! This changes everything. But the author used 2, yes two, yDNA Identifier and came back with the same results. WTF.
Was Mike right?! He said salvery never really existed as we were taught. He said the numbers never add up. I was on the fence but now. Here is the proof if the data holds up. This creates a whole new narrative.
More aDNA of the Americas is needed.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
“Distribution of paternal lineages in Mestizo populations throughout Mexico: an in silico study based on Y-STR haplotypes” J. A. Aguilar-Velázquez & H. Rangel-Villalobos
In the Mexican population sample, we found African (2.1%)
quote:Originally posted by xyyman:
But more astonishing is the E1b1a-V38. These are not West African slaves. Isn’t this Mota? E-V38 is virtually non-existence in West Africa.
Are you are that E1b1a-V38 is the most common genetic paternal lineage found today in West/Central African males and African Americans?
Are you that incompetent?
quote:Originally posted by xyyman:
@Lioness, it is impossible for that predominance of R-V88 to be in Mexico. IMPOSSIBLE!!!!! unless this is pre-historic. IMPOSSIBLE! '
R-V88 comes from the Cameroon West Central Africa and some neighboring regions, what's the problem?
quote:Originally posted by xyyman:
Either they (researchers) made a mistake
They did make some mistakes but I'll get into
As for the genetic analysis in this article it's all secondary and further investigation should be in these references, some of it their own other STR research articles. -- Just email the authors of the OP article it's much easier say "nice article" and ask some question about the data (without revealing wacky agenda)
Materials and methods The following published Y-STR population datasets from Mexican Mestizos were analyzed (Fig. 1): Chihuahua (n = 280) [8], Monterrey (n = 656) [9], Zacatecas (n = 38) [10], Queretaro (n = 108), Puebla (n = 44) [11], Jalisco (n = 86), Guanajuato (n = 98), Chiapas (n = 146), Yucatan (n = 170) [12], and Mexico City (n = 243) [13].
________________
References
8. Gutierrez-Alarcon AB, Moguel-Torres M, Leon-Jimenez AK, Cuellar-Nevarez GE, Rangel-Villalobos H. Allele and haplotype distribution for 16 Y-STRs (AmpFlSTR Y-filer kit) in the state of Chihuahua at North Center of Mexico. Leg Med. 2007;9:154–7.
9. Ramos-González B, Aguilar-Velázquez JA, de Lourdes ChávezBriones M, del Rocío Escareño-Hernández M, Alfaro-Lopez E. Genetic population data of three Y-STR genetic systems in Mexican-Mestizos from Monterrey, Nuevo Leon (Northeast, Mexico). Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2017;29:e21–e22.
10. Vallín-Reza EJ, Trejo-Medinilla FD. Genética poblacional del cromosoma “Y” en el estado de Zacatecas, México. Archivos de Med. 2012;8:e1–e14.
11. Santana C, Noris G, Meraz-Ríos MA, Magaña JJ, CalderonAranda ES, Muñoz MdL. et al. Genetic Analysis of 17 Y-STRs in a Mestizo population from the Central Valley of Mexico. Hum Biol. 2014;86:289–312.
12. Salazar-Flores J, Dondiego-Aldape R, Rubi-Castellanos R, Anaya-Palafox M, Nuño-Arana I, Canseco-Avila LM, et al. Population structure and paternal admixture landscape on presentday Mexican-Mestizos revealed by Y-STR haplotypes. Am J Hum Biol. 2010;22:401–9.
13. López-Ramírez YL, Aguilar-Velázquez JA, López-Armenta M, Ruiz-Hernández M, Rangel-Villalobos H. Paternal lineages and forensic parameters based on 23 Y-STRs (Powerplex® Y23) in Mestizo males from Mexico City. Int J Leg Med. 2020;134:199–202.
The question now is where the story of “African slaves” came from and to what extent was slavery? As I mentioned above the “lumvee”/Native American paper has the lineage about 40% R1b but it was not clear if it was R-V88. But the author in that paper speculated about European admixture in Native Americans. A lie!!!!! I mentioned to Tukuler that if someone did a deep dive this R1b could be really R-V88. And here now with the paper. Bada bing! These are NOT European R1b!
Bada bing! R-V88 comes from West Central Africa bordering the Atlantic
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yep. Something is not right. How can the data be correct.
What do I mean? There are no R1b-M269. ie no "modern" European males lineage in Mexico. Maybe it is embedded in the "other" lineage. ie there were no Spanish colonist ie no conquistadors, no Columbus, no colonization. Holy Shyte!!
Aside from that several things stand out.
Is the E-V38 undefined* as Mota? Is it really M2? Why are they classifying E1b1b as "European"
When
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
"Nowadays, the highest genetic diversity of haplogroup E1b1b is observed in Northeast Africa, especially in Ethiopia and Somalia, which also have the monopoly of older and rarer branches like M281, V6 or V92. This suggests that E1b1b may indeed have appeared in East Africa, then expanded north until the Levant. Nevertheless, many lineages now found among the Ethiopians and Somalians appear to have come from the Fertile Crescent during the Neolithic period. This includes some E1b1b subclades like V22 (12,000 years old) and V32 (10,000 years old), but also undeniably Near Eastern lineages like T1a-CTS2214 and J1-L136."
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
These people are crazy. E-V38 is found in ALL Mexican populations. Meaning it is not localized. This implies an ancient origin. The percentage is about the same throughout Mexico. Indicating also an ancient origin. >500years ago.
Yep! They lied to us….again
Quote: “Conversely, European ancestry was mainly represented by the R1b-V88 haplogroup (Table 2), which is very common in Western Europe [21] and likely represents the geographic origin of most of the European colonizers who arrived in Mexico during the Conquest period [1]. The E1b1a-V38 haplogroup that was found in almost all the Mexican-Mestizo populations has a Western African origin, principally in Nigger-Congo language speakers that spread to other parts of Africa during the Bantu expansion [22]. According to historical records [23], this haplogroup is likely linked to most of the African slaves brought to Mexico during the Spanish conquest.”
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
^^ look at this, there is a spelling error there so egregious I can't post the image
And they also say "Conversely, European ancestry was mainly represented by the R1b-V88 haplogroup"
While R1b is the most common European paternal lineage the clade R1b-V88 is highly uncommon in Europe. I think these rookies may not even know that this clade is most common in Africa
But I question how they predicted this clade. The easiest way to resolve it is send them an email, they have the address on the article __________________
Or if you prefer say to yourself, this mighty be a mistake but I like the theories I can come up with using it so I'll roll with it
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I will role with it...... Published by Springer a reputable Scientific magazine.
I ignored the spelling Lioness. They may be rookies...who knows.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
“Distribution of paternal lineages in Mestizo populations throughout Mexico: an in silico study based on Y-STR haplotypes” J. A. Aguilar-Velázquez & H. Rangel-Villalobos
European ancestry (50.1%), followed by Native American (32.5%),
In the Mexican population sample, we found African (2.1%)
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Quote:
"Nowadays, the highest genetic diversity of haplogroup E1b1b is observed in Northeast Africa
This is credible not only did Cameroonian colonists from West Africa settle in Mexico before the Europeans But a whole other group of Africans from Northeast Africa also settle in Mexico before the Europeans !
either that the Mestizos with E1b1b got it from their being half Spanish
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
yep! Just as I now question MSM indoctrination of Covid-19. I am seeing first hand how mis-information can spread and what is accepted as "the new normal" can be a total lie.
...what about all the Europeans carrying R-V88 decided to leave Europe and settle in Mexico in the 1600's. As my grandma use to say .......name your poison.
As stated earlier. Indonesian women in canoes rowing 4000miles across Indian Ocean to settle in Africa vs West African migrating a land bridge circa 5000years to the closest geographic point from "Cameroon/Mexico".
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
...what about all the Europeans carrying R-V88 decided to leave Europe and settle in Mexico in the 1600's. As my grandma use to say .......name your poison.
What does it matter? Mexico imported slaves and the highest frequency of R-V88 is in West Africa
[ 17. September 2020, 10:28 AM: Message edited by: the lioness, ]
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
He! HE! You are such a.... 50% of Mexicans carry R-V88 so half of Mexicans are descendants of Cameroonians? SMH. As my grandmother use to tell me…”shut your mouth if you have nothing to add”.
quote:
"Conversely, European ancestry was mainly represented by the R1b-V88 haplogroup (Table 2), which is very common in Western Europe [21] and likely represents the geographic origin of most of the European colonizers who arrived in Mexico during the Conquest period [1]. The E1b1a-V38 haplogroup that was found in almost all the Mexican-Mestizo populations has a Western African origin, principally in Nig*er-Congo language speakers that spread to other parts of Africa during the Bantu expansion [22]. According to historical records [23], this haplogroup is likely linked to most of the African slaves brought to Mexico during the Spanish conquest."
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by xyyman:
...what about all the Europeans carrying R-V88 decided to leave Europe and settle in Mexico in the 1600's. As my grandma use to say .......name your poison.
What does it matter? Mexico imported slaves and the highest frequency of R-V88 is in West Africa
[ 17. September 2020, 10:31 AM: Message edited by: the lioness, ]
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: He! HE! You are such a.... 50% of Mexicans carry R-V88 so half of Mexicans are descendants of Cameroonians? SMH. As my grandmother use to tell me…”shut your mouth if you have nothing to add”.
quote:
"Conversely, European ancestry was mainly represented by the R1b-V88 haplogroup (Table 2), which is very common in Western Europe [21] and likely represents the geographic origin of most of the European colonizers who arrived in Mexico during the Conquest period [1]. The E1b1a-V38 haplogroup that was found in almost all the Mexican-Mestizo populations has a Western African origin, principally in Nig*er-Congo language speakers that spread to other parts of Africa during the Bantu expansion [22]. According to historical records [23], this haplogroup is likely linked to most of the African slaves brought to Mexico during the Spanish conquest."
If R-V88 was common in Mexico the several large scale DNA studies in Mexicans which are mentioned in wikipedias entry on Mexicans would be turning up R1-V88 Also there would be Mexicans on youtube who have taken DNA tests talking about
More likely the researchers screwed up just like they screwed up the spelling or Niger Congo
But suppose you like the mistake and want to roll with it? R1-V88 doesn't even seem to be common in AAs, you don't hear people talking about it or it turning up in large scales studies on AAs although it's likely small relatively very small amount of people with Chad basin ancestry have it
It's found in the Cameroon region. Suppose they did find all this R-V88 in Mexico. It doesn't contribute to a theory of Pre-Columbian any more than it does that a group of Cameroonians happened to be delivered in a slave import to Mexico (which would be just as or more likely). Incidentally I think the R-V88 carriers in that Chad basin region are Fula but I'm not sure if exclusively. Some Fulani are R-V88 carriers others hap E
You could look at any location in the slave diaspora of the Americas or Carib Islands and it could have been possible that in some particular place some Africans of a tribe with less common DNA turned up somewhere particular outside Africa. that would not be far fetched
However this R-V88 is not turning up in other studies and that is a sign of error
Then setting aside the slave trade and looking at the possibility of trans Continental Pre-Colombian African voyage to America to, say Mexico or Brazil, that does not then necessarily change the history of the Trans Atlantic slave trade. Like I said R-V88 is not turning up in significant amounts in large scale studies of AAs. So you could still have the same Trans Atlantic import of slaves and then at the same time a small group of Africans who made it to the Americas before Columbus, these are not mutually exclusive possibilities and such an early voyage then doesn't cancel out a vastly larger slave trade.
In fact the ancestry of AAs would be more in question if there was evidence of a voyage with human remains and the remains bore E1 rather than R1-V88 which is rare outside of Africa
It's the same thing with East African DNA in the early United States. That doesn't enhance a Pre-columbian voyage theory it just enhances the fact that an person with East African ancestry could have wound up in West Africa before coming to America
posted
You are still not getting it. WHERE ARE THE “EUROPEAN” HAPLOGROUPS?????!!!!!! THE EUROPEAN y-DNA which is 70%(R1b-M269) in Spain are virtually Absent in Mexico!!! Did the Spaniards actually travel to Mexico?
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: You are still not getting it. WHERE ARE THE “EUROPEAN” HAPLOGROUPS?????!!!!!! THE are virtually Absent in Mexico!!! Did the EUROPEAN y-DNA which is 70%(R1b-M269) in Spain Spaniards actually travel to Mexico?
Yes the Spanish went to Mexico do we need to lock you up in the loony bin?
None of them support that ( I could start posting the data but why waste time of this silliness)
then if you still don't believe it send an email to Aguilar-Velázquez & Rangel-Villalobos and ask them what the data is indicating R-V88 and say "are you sure about that clade, I don't see it mentioned in other articles)
“Distribution of paternal lineages in Mestizo populations throughout Mexico: an in silico study based on Y-STR haplotypes” J. A. Aguilar-Velázquez & H. Rangel-Villalobos __________________
but of course you won't do this
>because you know it's an error and you don't want to see the proof it is because that would pop the conspiracy fantasy bubble
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am not sure if it is an error or not. So I am not going to discuss conspiracy. I was taught as a youngster in school about slavery and the Italian Spaniard Columbus. For my entire life I believed this is what happened 100-400ya. I even believed this talk about “They Came before Columbus” was utter nonsense. As a young Africanist I critique Van Sertima to the chagrin of fellow Africanist. I started having doubts when I read some of L Angels work and analysis of affluent “Negroid” skeleton in the “early” part of Caribbean History. The Genetics started becoming available on these early “Negroid” skeletons, eg Zouesteg(sp) 3, and here in the US. The genetic results did not align with the popular narrative. Now this paper if correct blows up the narrative completely.
Eg the Genetic Analysis of the early “Spaniards” in Puerto Rico show these were more Africans(North) than European Iberians ie Moors.
Now I am not sure what to believe. But this paper OP, if correct, has been the icing on the cake.
I go where the data takes me. “When you have eliminated the impossible whatever remains must be the truth”
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
2016 Census estimate) Racial and ethnic composition in Puerto Rico - 2016 Census estimate
(self identified)
White (2,825,100) 75.8%
Black or African American (461,498) 12.4%
Asian (6,831) 0.2%
Two or more races (122,246) 3.3%
American Indian (19,839) 0.5%
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander(370) 0.1%
Other races (289,905) 7.8%
Total:3,411,307[22]
100.0% ________________________
According to the National Geographic Genographic Project,
"the average Puerto Rican individual carries 12% Native American, 65% West Eurasian (Mediterranean, Northern European and/or Middle Eastern) and 20% Sub-Saharan African DNA." ________________________________________
The 1834 Royal Census of Puerto Rico established that 11% of the population were slaves, 35% were colored freemen (also known as free people of color in French colonies, meaning people of mixed-race), and 54% were white. In the following decade, the number of the slave population increased more than tenfold to 258,000, the result mostly of increased importation to meet the demand for labor on sugar plantations.
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am talking about the "early" migrants to Puerto Rico. Circa Columbus. The paper clearly shows these people have little relation to Spaniards. They were more align to Africans/Canary Islanders.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
To the newbies reading this. There are several problems or issues raised with this dataset. Besides the R1b being R-V88 the jaw dropper is that there were twice as many E1b1b ie North Africans than South Saharans type, E1b1a. Again this resembles the genetic profile of early Puerto Ricans and the Zoustreg(sp?) 3.
The genetic profile do NOT align with the historical narrative.
I would like to see the mtDNA profile of these Mexicans. See if it aligns with ……Cape Verde. I keep telling Capra. Cape Verdeans will play a key role in unraveling this. The population on the other side of the Atlantic.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: To the newbies reading this. There are several problems or issues raised with this dataset. Besides the R1b being R-V88 the jaw dropper is that there were twice as many E1b1b ie North Africans than South Saharans type, E1b1a. Again this resembles the genetic profile of early Puerto Ricans and the Zoustreg(sp?) 3.
The genetic profile do NOT align with the historical narrative.
I would like to see the mtDNA profile of these Mexicans. See if it aligns with ……Cape Verde. I keep telling Capra. Cape Verdeans will play a key role in unraveling this. The population on the other side of the Atlantic.
We have been taught a false historical narrative about Mexico. You can only understand the influence of African DNA in Mexico after researching the origin of the Moors of Iberia, the Mali exploration of the Americas after 1310AD, the first slaves introduced to Mexico and the Mexican Inquisition.
A cursory examination of these experiences or events all lead to a common denominator the population of Guinea-Bissau. It is from Guinea-Bissau to Cameroon that we find Africans carrying R1 V88 and M269.
It was African people from Guinea-Bissau, especially in the case of Senegal, which provided the vast majority of Muslims that conquered Iberia. It was Muslims from Guinea-Bissau that created the Islamic influence in Mexico in the 1500's, which led to the Mexican inquisition. In addition, the Mali Empire ruled by Mansa Abubakari, led to 10's of thousands of Malians sailing to the Americas in 1310. The Mali Empire included many people who carried R1. It is this history that explains why R1 is carried by Mestizos, and Native Americans.
Once you look at the true history of African people in America there is no mystery. Haven't you ever wondered why the Spanish had Moors as interpreters so they could communicate with the Indians? If there were Moorish interpreters who could speak the language, there must of been a lingua franca that both the Moors and Native Americans spoke that facilitated a common mode of communication. In other words, the Spanish knew about the Americas before the went on their so-called "voyage to discover" the Americas. This lingua franca was probably Malinke-Bambara which was spoken by the Malian elites.
Back in the 1980's I wrote about the Mexican Inquisition and influence of Senegal Muslims in Mexico which led to this event. If you are expecting Europeans to truely explain our history and phylogeography it will never happen. It can never happen because Europeans lie about OUR history, so they can have a history of their own.
You have to remember that population genetics papers never state a hypothesis--so these papers are not based on the scientific method--they are mainly full of raw data that should be fully analyzed to reach reliable and valid conclusions.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
LOL xyyman I want to remind you that mtDNA haplogroups A,B,C,D are just the American and Asian names for the African M1 haplogroup.
Europeans go out of their way to change the name of haplogroups to disguise the African origin of DNA. I guess they have not changed the name of V88, and instead just claim it as European so they can deny the African origin of the first Europeans. .
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic