posted
I posted on this awhile back. Several months ago on here and ESR. The final version of the study has been reported on PNAS. The full study with the Supplemental
Ignoring the BS title of the study as usual
If I had another dollar…..? ----------------------------
Early farmers from across Europe directly descended from Neolithic Aegeans- Zuzana Hofmanová June2016
QUOTE: observed in Neolithic farmers from across Europe; consistent with Aegean Neolithic populations, unlike central European Neolithic populations, being the direct descendants of the preceding Mesolithic peoples who inhabited broadly the same region. However, we caution against over-interpretation of the Aegean Mesolithic mtDNA data; additional genome-level data will be required to identify the Mesolithic source population(s) of the early Aegean farmers.
Functional Variation Sequences in and around genes underlying the phenotypes hypothesized to have undergone positive selection in Europeans indicate that the Neolithic Aegeans were unlikely to have been lactase persistent but carried derived SLC24A5 rs1426654 and SLC45A2 rs16891982 alleles associated with reduced skin pigmentation. Because our Aegean samples predate the period when the rs4988235 T-allele associated with lactase persistence in Eurasia reached an appreciable frequency in Europe, around 4 kya (12–14), and because this allele remains at relatively low frequencies 0.15) in modern Greek, Turkish, and Sardinian populations (15), this observation is unsurprising. However, despite their relatively low latitude, four of the Aegean individuals are homozygous for the derived rs1426654 T-allele in the SLC24A5 gene, and four carry at least one copy of the derived rs16891982 G-allele in the SLC45A2 gene. This suggests that these reduced-pigmentation–associated alleles were at appreciable frequency in Neolithic Aegeans and that skin depigmentation was *****not solely a high-latitude phenomenon******!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The derived rs12913832 G-allele in the HERC2 domain of the OCA2 gene was heterozygous in one individual (Klei10), but all other Aegeans for whom the allelic state at this locus could be determined were homozygous for the ancestral allele, indicating a lack of iris depigmentation in these individuals. Examination of several SNPs in the TCF7L2 gene region
We calculated f4 statistics to examine whether the Aegean Neolithic farmers shared drift with genomes from the Spanish Epicardial site Els Trocs in the Pyrenees (3, 12) that is distinct from that shared with Early Neolithic genomes from Germany and Hungary. In a test of the form f4 (Germany/Hungary EN, Spain EN, Aegean, Khomani), we infer SIGNIFICANT UNIQUE drift among Neolithic Aegeans (not significantly in Bar8) and Early Neolithic Spain to the exclusion of Hungarian and German Neolithic genomes The best explanation for this observation is that migration to southwestern Europe started in the Aegean but was independent from the movement to Germany via Hungary. BS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Lie!!!!!!!!
Interestingly, Ötzi the Tyrolean Iceman (11) shows unique shared drift with Aegeans to the exclusion of Hungarian Early Neolithic farmers and Late and Post Neolithic European genomes and feasibly represents a relict of Early Neolithic Aegeans
Relation to Modern Populations Most of the modern Anatolian and Aegean populations do not appear to be the direct descendants of Neolithic peoples from the same region. Indeed, our mixture model comparison of the Aegean genomes to >200 modern groups (2) indicates low affinity between the two Anatolian Neolithic genomes and six of eight modern Turkish samples; the other two were sampled near the Aegean Sea at a location close to the site of the Neolithic genomes. Furthermore, when we form each Anatolian Neolithic genome as a mixture of all modern groups, we infer no contributions from groups in southeastern Anatolia and the Levant, where the earliest Neolithic sites are found . Similarly, comparison of allele sharing between ancient and modern genomes to those expected under population continuity indicates Neolithic-to-modern discontinuity in Greece and western Anatolia, unless ancestral populations were unrealistically small
Instead, our mixing analysis shows that each Aegean Neolithic genome closely corresponds to modern Mediterraneans (68% contributions from southern Europe) and in particular to Sardinians (25%), as also seen in the PCA and outgroup f3 statistics with few substantial contributions from elsewhere. Modern groups matching the Neolithics—mostly from the Mediterranean and North Africa— STRIKINGLY match more to Bar8 from northwestern Anatolia than to the LBK genome from Stuttgart in Germany, indicating that the LBK genome experienced processes such as drift and admixture that were independent from the Mediterranean expansion route, consistent with the dual expansion model.
Concluding Remarks Over the past 7 years, ancient DNA studies have transformed our understanding of the European Neolithic transition (1–4, 12, 13), demonstrating a crucial role for migration in central and southwestern Europe. Our results further advance this transformative understanding by extending the unbroken trail of ancestry and migration all of the way back to southwestern Asia. The high levels of shared drift between Aegean and all available Early Neolithic genomes in Europe, together with the inferred unique drift between Neolithic Aegeans and Early Neolithic genomes from Northern Spain to the EXCLUSION of Early Neolithic genomes from central Europe, indicate that Aegean Neolithic populations can be considered the root for all early European farmers and that at least TWO INDEPENDENT COLONIZATION ROUTES were followed. A key remaining question is whether this unbroken trail of ancestry and migration extends all the way back to southeastern Anatolia and the Fertile Crescent, where the earliest Neolithic sites in the world are found. Regardless of whether the Aegean early farmers ultimately descended from western or central Anatolian, or even Levantine hunter-gatherers, the differences between the ancient genomes presented here and those from the Caucasus (20) indicate that there was considerable structuring of forager populations in southwestern Asia before the transition to farming. The DISSIMILARITY and LACK of continuity of the Early Neolithic Aegean genomes to most MODERN Turkish and Levantine populations, in contrast to those of early central and southwestern European farmers and modern Mediterraneans, is best explained by subsequent gene flow into Anatolia from still unknown sources.
--------------------------------------------
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
Several things are made clear from the study. Confirming what I have said a long time ago.
1. The Modern peoples in the Levant, Greece and Turkey are not the indigenous populations. They are new “Turk/Asian” migrants. 2. Regardless of phenotype modern Europeans are essentially depigmented Africans 3. The African Neolithics brought depigmentation into Europe. Ie white skin came from Africans 4. These Neolithic Africans although lighter in pigmentation had dark eyes. 5. Light eyes were brought in by the first African migrants. See ESR 6. There was a central source of Paleolithic and Neolithic people migrating to Europe. That source was the African Sahara. I knew that from the U5a vs U5b, R1a vs R1b, H1 and H3 vs other H sub-clades patterns. 7. There were TWO independent entry points into Europe FROM Africa. The Levant was NOT the source. That is why there is a divergence of haplogroups for male and females 8. The authors tried their best to lie and be honest at the same time. Hence the title but within the study you can tell their conscience is conflicted. They are still reluctant to admit the source is Africa but they know it is not Levant, Greece, Anatolia or Sardinia. They left it open.
-------------------- 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 need to be paid for this shyte. Sammi!, Neal! Ausar! Where you at? Lol! Stop rifling through my inbox and removing stuff.
-------------------- 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 |
-------------------- 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
Quote: --------- Pigmentation Rev5, Klei10, Bar8, and Bar 31 were all observed to carry homozygous derived alleles at SLC24A5 rs1426654 (A111T); this SNP, which is associated with skin depigmentation, is nearly _xed in modern Europeans (1000 Genomes EUR frequency > 0:99 [155]), including modern Greek > 0:99 and Turkish > 0:98 populations [156], and known to be under strong natural selection [130, 157]. The Klei10, Bar8, and Bar31 individuals carried the 16-SNP FOUNDER HAPLOTYPES !!!!!on which the SLC24A5 A111T is believed to have ARISEN [158]; Pal7, in which the core SLC24A5 A111T mutation could not be genotyped, may have also carried this haplotype (see Table S31).
Derived alleles of the SLC45A2 rs16891982 L374F mutation, also associated with skin depigmentation and identifed as under selection in modern and ancient Europeans [157, 159], were observed in the Klei10, Pal7, Bar31, and Bar8 individuals. This allele is nearing _xation in modern Europeans (1000 Genomes EUR frequency 0.94 [160]), and is at high frequency in modern Greek (0.86) and Turkish (0.68) populations [156]. The Klei10, Bar8, and Bar31 genotypes at a panel of SLC45A2 markers are compatible with the inference that these individuals carried at least one copy of the putative SLC45A2, L374F FOUNDER HAPLOTYPE!!!! [161], however, the haplotype
Additional Functional Markers No derived alleles were observed for any of the ALDH2 or ADH1B alcohol-metabolism-associated mutations under selection in modern Asians [175, 176], and all 5 ancient Aegeans carried the common European ****ancestral ****** genotypes at the EDAR locus under selection in Asians [157] (see Table S32).
-------------------
So there you have it. “white Africans” entering Europe bringing the white gene into Europe. According to Sergi. They started in the foothills of the Kenyan mountains. Adapting and morphing for thousands of years. They encountered a darker race as they entered Europe. This old black race were one of the early migrants to Europe(Hoffmye/La Brana?). As these Africans went further north they became lighter and lighter. THEN the Asian Turks came about 1300ad???
Now what lead to the virtual extermination of the black Europeans still needs to be worked out but obviously even in Greco-Roman times these Negroids features still existed in Europe.
Remember modern Africans carry MORE variability around the SLC24A5 gene than Europeans. Which supports Relethords assertion that Africans have a greater range in skin pigmentation AND the capability to develop light skin. In fact Shriver et al confirmed that already. See my thread on ESR.
Notice also the EDAR is NOT present at frequency in these African Neolithics. Further proof Europeans are a sub-set of Africans.
This is not rocker science.
The geographic pattern is the same for yDNA R1b vs R1a. The only question is why the African female Neolithic line remained up to today and the bronze age yDNA line replaced the African male Neolithic Line. Was Mike Hammer right? “off with their heads and unto their women”. Nah! The genetics do not support that. But something happened that changed the genetic makeup of Europe.
More to come.
-------------------- 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 those who are following the argument/discussion. We know Africans have more variability around the SLC24A5 genes etc. Indicative of the origin but remember La Brana and Neanderthal was “fixed” with the gene for black skin. They carried no variability speculating they were “jet” black in skin. Why? An intelligent person would ask. How come? Obviously black was the dominant skin color since the time of Neanderthal going back 400,000years!!!! Balck made us human. Was this new gene for light skin really “new”? Was it a mutation or are Euroepans scientist getting wrong….again?
I am speculating it was never a mutation and it always existed. But why did it become so dominant. What does the light skin Khoi-Sam have to do with it ..if anything.
-------------------- 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: Quote: --------- Pigmentation Rev5, Klei10, Bar8, and Bar 31 were all observed to carry homozygous derived alleles at SLC24A5 rs1426654 (A111T); this SNP, which is associated with skin depigmentation, is nearly _xed in modern Europeans (1000 Genomes EUR frequency > 0:99 [155]), including modern Greek > 0:99 and Turkish > 0:98 populations [156], and known to be under strong natural selection [130, 157]. The Klei10, Bar8, and Bar31 individuals carried the 16-SNP FOUNDER HAPLOTYPES !!!!!on which the SLC24A5 A111T is believed to have ARISEN [158]; Pal7, in which the core SLC24A5 A111T mutation could not be genotyped, may have also carried this haplotype (see Table S31).
Derived alleles of the SLC45A2 rs16891982 L374F mutation, also associated with skin depigmentation and identifed as under selection in modern and ancient Europeans [157, 159], were observed in the Klei10, Pal7, Bar31, and Bar8 individuals. This allele is nearing _xation in modern Europeans (1000 Genomes EUR frequency 0.94 [160]), and is at high frequency in modern Greek (0.86) and Turkish (0.68) populations [156]. The Klei10, Bar8, and Bar31 genotypes at a panel of SLC45A2 markers are compatible with the inference that these individuals carried at least one copy of the putative SLC45A2, L374F FOUNDER HAPLOTYPE!!!! [161], however, the haplotype
Additional Functional Markers No derived alleles were observed for any of the ALDH2 or ADH1B alcohol-metabolism-associated mutations under selection in modern Asians [175, 176], and all 5 ancient Aegeans carried the common European ****ancestral ****** genotypes at the EDAR locus under selection in Asians [157] (see Table S32).
-------------------
So there you have it. “white Africans” entering Europe bringing the white gene into Europe. According to Sergi. They started in the foothills of the Kenyan mountains. Adapting and morphing for thousands of years. They encountered a darker race as they entered Europe. This old black race were one of the early migrants to Europe(Hoffmye/La Brana?). As these Africans went further north they became lighter and lighter. THEN the Asian Turks came about 1300ad???
Now what lead to the virtual extermination of the black Europeans still needs to be worked out but obviously even in Greco-Roman times these Negroids features still existed in Europe.
Remember modern Africans carry MORE variability around the SLC24A5 gene than Europeans. Which supports Relethords assertion that Africans have a greater range in skin pigmentation AND the capability to develop light skin. In fact Shriver et al confirmed that already. See my thread on ESR.
Notice also the EDAR is NOT present at frequency in these African Neolithics. Further proof Europeans are a sub-set of Africans.
This is not rocker science.
The geographic pattern is the same for yDNA R1b vs R1a. The only question is why the African female Neolithic line remained up to today and the bronze age yDNA line replaced the African male Neolithic Line. Was Mike Hammer right? “off with their heads and unto their women”. Nah! The genetics do not support that. But something happened that changed the genetic makeup of Europe.
More to come.
There was no replacement of the African y-DNA line.
You have to realize that R1b is carried by Africans, while the Dravidians who belonged to the C-Group culture carry R1a. This makes it clear that when the Kushites migrated into Eurasia 5kya they reintroduced R1 to Eurasia, which was originally introduced by the Cro-Magnon or Khoisan people 30kya.
posted
I am not disputing R1 or R1b is African. The geographic pattern confirms that. But R1b was NOT the dominant male line until AFTER the Bronze Age. The female line entered during the eNeolithic. But there was obviously a transition in the male line recently/Bronze Iron Age. Why?
aDNA of Vikings and European Royals even into the Medieval Age confirms these Euroeean Kings are not R1b. So what happened?
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: I am not disputing R1 or R1b is African. The geographic pattern confirms that. But R1b was NOT the dominant male line until AFTER the Bronze Age. The female line entered during the eNeolithic. But there was obviously a transition in the male line recently/Bronze Iron Age. Why?
aDNA of Vikings and European Royals even into the Medieval Age confirms these Euroeean Kings are not R1b. So what happened?
That's easy. You forget that after the flood the Anu, who had ruled Eurasian 10kya were being replaced 5kya by the Kushites.
The Anu were the pygmy people who founded the first civilizations in Sumer (Ubaid) and Egypt.
Many cultures mention ancient stories about a Great Flood. I personally don’t believe that a worldwide flood occurred in ancient times. But I do believe that there was formerly between 4000-3500 BC, a rise in sea-level that flooded many centers of civilization in Eurasia, the Americas and Europe.
quote: The hypothesis that the flood levels at Kish and Shuruppak represent the same event is no more than an assumption. Flood events occurred with frequency throughout southern Mesopotamia, as the two separate early flood levels at Kish indicate. Even more so than the Ur flood, the flood levels at Kish and Shuruppak fail to fulfill the biblical or even the Mesopotamian literary descriptions. In the degree to which those descriptions are "rationalized," any criteria for distinguishing between the biblical Flood and virtually any other flood disappear. The flood remains at Kish and Shuruppak are hardly imposing. The silt at Kish averages less than ten inches thick, and the deposit at Shuruppak is about fifteen inches-in comparison to up to eleven feet of material at Ur (Raikes, 1967, pp. 52-63). The severity of a flood cannot necessarily be deduced from the thickness of an isolated sample of the flood deposit. It is nonetheless suggestive that thicker, more impressive deposits from another flood have been discovered at Kish, dating too late to be identified with the innundation of the Bible and Mesopotamian literature, and yet that later flood left no record in history (Watelin, 1934, pp. 41-43; Mallowan, 1964, pp. 78-79 and plate XX). All that remains is the possibility that the Kish and Shuruppak materials do represent the same event and coincide chronologically with the date of about 2900 BCE for the Flood of Mesopotamian literary tradition.
The flood materials from Ur, Kish, and Shuruppak were excavated over half a century ago. Woolley's description of the flood level at Ur is far from scientific. It is not even possible to be sure of the exact number of sondages in which he found flood remains. While attempts to dismiss the remains of the Ur flood as merely windblown sand are unsubstantiated and probably unsubstantiatable, the two "scientific" examinations of materials from the Ur flood stratum are, by modern standards, vague and inconclusive. The same situation prevails at Kish and Shuruppak (Raikes, 1967, pp. 52-63). In all probability, the finds do represent floods, but the exact character of those events—fluvial or marine, rapid or slow deposition, unitary or episodic—remains unknown. The hydrology of southern Mesopotamia is very complex. Renewed excavation and modern scientific techniques could probably solve many of these questions, but current political and military conditions would seem to preclude any such activity in the near future. Until the situation changes, there are no compelling grounds on which to conclude that the Flood story found its ultimate beginning in an actual event that has been identified at Kish and Shuruppak or anywhere else in Mesopotamia.
The Anu or Pgymies founded wonderful civilization around the world. At the advent of the European discovery of the world Pygmy communities were found on every continent. I believe that the Great Flood, or rise in Sea levels around 4000-3500 BC caused the destruction of their centers of civilization. It was this rise in sea levels that probably led to the Anu being stranded in Eurasia, and their subsequent withdrawal into marginal regions as new people, the Kushites, Hua (Mongoloid people, mainly Chinese) and later the Indo-Europeans who drove them out of Europe.
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I believe that the original founders of the African Aqualithic were pgymy people. Nilo-Saharans may have learned this cultural tradition from the Anu or pgymy people.
The Anu or Black pygmies type may represent the Natufians who began to migrate out of Africa after 20,000 and settled in the Levant which was first settled by Cro Magnon people who early replaced the Neanderthal folk. The Natufians would represent the fourth African migration into Eurasia.
Overtime the Anu established a worldwide metals trade network. The Anu traded in metals and used Mesopotamia and Egypt as major centers of their civilization.
In Mesopotamia the Anu invented the cuneiform writing to keep business records. Here they also began to employ Gutians to work in their mines. These Gutians were the ancestors of the Syrians/Iraqis and Persians. After the 4000 BC when a great flood occured the Anu centers of power declined.
By the time the Anu entered Eurasia the Classical mongoloid people who are the ancestors of the Indonesians/Vietnamese/Filipinos and etc. were probably already settled in Anatolia. The classical mongoloids probably constructed Catal Huyuk. The close relationship between Sumerian and the AustroAsiatic languages suggest that the classical Mongoloid people may have also inhabited Mesopotamia by the time the Sumerians entered the area.
The Anu introduced civilization to Mesopotamia. The Anu probably represent the Ubaid people.
The Anu ruled the world before the great flood. The Anu were the pygmy people. The great flood left many Anu (pygymy) populations isolated around the world.
In Mesopotamia the Anu were unable to defend their civilization from attacks by the Hill people (Gutians). The Anu probably invented the cuneiform scrpt. This writing system was used for commercial purposes in Mesopotamia. The Anu introduced mining into the region.
The Kushites after Flood took over the Anu mining interests. The Kushites founded Sumer. Due to their Kushite origin they refered to themselves as the Kings of Kish/Kush. The Kushites came from Nubia.
The Kushites or Sumerians originally used the Proto-Sharan script. Due to the common use of cuneiform by commercial interest in Meopotamia the Sumerians abandoned Proto-Sumerian writing.
Cuneiform may have been invented by the Anu. But they also wrote inscriptions in syllabic Thinite.
Anu first rulers of Egypt
Nar mar conquering the Anu ?
.
quote:Originally posted by Wally: The Anu People
The most significant fact of the founding of Pharaonic Civilization by the Anu people is rarely, if ever, mentioned in texts on Ancient Egypt. Not to mention the Anu is actually worse than, say, writing a history of the United States of America and not mentioning the Pilgrims (aka "Founders"/"Forefathers"). One has to look at earlier texts for this vital information:
quote: Amélineau, is credited with the discovery of the Anu and their contribution to Egyptian civilization. It was Amélineau who designated the first black race to occupy Egypt as the Anu. He showed how they came slowly down the Nile and founded the cities of Esneh, Erment, Qouch and Heliopolis. The actual name is always written with three columns. He states that "All those cities have the characteristic symbol which serves to denote the name Anu." The original name for Heliopolis is "Annu". "Egypt's greatest Masters, Osiris, Hermes, Isis, and Horus all belonged to "the old race", the black Anu." (Chandler, 1999)
From Amélineau:
quote: These Anu were agricultural people, raising cattle on a large scale along the Nile, shutting themselves up in walled cities for defensive purposes. To this people we can attribute, without fear of error, the most ancient Egyptian books, The Book of the Dead and the Texts of the Pyramids, consequently, all the myths or religious teachings. I would add almost all the philosophical systems then known and still called Egyptian. They evidently knew the crafts necessary for any civilization and were familiar with the tools those trades required. They knew how to use metals, at least elementary metals. They made the earliest attempts at writing, for the whole Egyptian tradition attributes this art to Thoth, the great Hermes an Anu like Osiris, who is called Onian in Chapter XV of The Book of the Dead and in the Texts of the Pyramids. Certainly the people already knew the principal arts; it left proof of this in the architecture of the tombs at Abydos, especially the tomb of Osiris and in those sepulchers objects have been found bearing unmistakable stamp of their origin, such as carved ivory, or a little head of a Nubian girl found in a tomb near that of Osiris, or the small wooden or ivory receptacles in the form of a feline head--all documents published in the first volumn of my Fouilles d'Abydos.
From the Kememu themselves
Anu.......................... the city of Heliopolis (Coptic; On) Anu Meh................... Anu of the north (Heliopolis) Anu Shemo................ Anu of the south (Hermonthis/Ermant) Anu Monti.................. Anu of Hermonthis Anu Tem.................... the Anu of Tem (Hermonthis) Anu Re...................... the Anu of Re Afdu Ikhu................... the Four Ancestors (of the Anu) Ugrit......................... Goddess of the Duat of Anu Djandjané Anu............ the Anu Court of Judges: Tem; Shu; Tefnut; Osiris; Thoth Anu n Ptoh................ the Anu of Ptah (Denderah) Anu n Nut.................. the Anu of Nut (Denderah)
Denderah
Judging by the sheer number of given titles, the most venerated city of Kemet was not Thebes, but Denderah. After all, this was the city where the Parents of the Kememu nation (Isis and Osiris) were born. (It is also in the same neighborhood as Naqada). Here are some of the titles of this city:
"The birthplace of Isis" "The Throne of the Queen" "The perfect throne in the Holy of Holies" "The place of joy" "The thrones of Horus" "The holy temple of Horus" "The throne of eternity" "The throne of the drink" "The birthplace of Nut" "The Golden House" "The Sanctuary of Osiris" "The Sanctuary of Re" "The city of the knowing of Isis" "The temple of life" "The temple of Hathor" "The eternal house" "The exalted temple" "The holy temple of Horus of the Two-Lands" "The house of knowledge" (per Rekhit)
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is one of many recent studies that confirm that the modern peoples of the Levant, Greece, Turkey are NOT the indigenous population. They are Asians Henn et al Fernandez et al This study …and DNAtribes have the modern Egytians(18% foriegn) are essentially Turks with an African substrate. That is why picture spamming is meaningless.
Quote: Relation to Modern Populations Most of the modern Anatolian and Aegean populations do ****not**** appear to be the direct descendants of Neolithic peoples from the same region. Indeed, our mixture model comparison of the Aegean genomes to >200 modern groups (2) indicates low affinity between the two Anatolian Neolithic genomes and six of eight modern Turkish samples; the other two were sampled near the Aegean Sea at a location close to the site of the Neolithic genomes. Furthermore, when we form each Anatolian Neolithic genome as a mixture of all modern groups, we infer**** no contributions ****from groups in southeastern Anatolia and the Levant, where the earliest Neolithic sites are found . Similarly, comparison of allele sharing between ancient and modern genomes to those expected under population continuity indicates Neolithic-to-modern ****discontinuity**** in Greece and western Anatolia, unless ancestral populations were unrealistically small
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here is where they are hedging their bet…… The y know they are grasping at straws. He! He! He! Afraid to be caught in a lie. --------------------------- QUOTE: observed in Neolithic farmers from across Europe; consistent with Aegean Neolithic populations, unlike central European Neolithic populations, being the direct descendants of the preceding Mesolithic peoples who inhabited broadly the same region. However, we ****caution against over-interpretation ****of the Aegean Mesolithic mtDNA data; ADDITIONAL genome-level data will be required to ****identify the Mesolithic SOURCE population(s)***** of the early Aegean farmers.
-------------------- 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
Henn did the same “hedging” with her infamous “back-migration paper” that supposedly took place 40,000ya. She stated that to confirm her theory of back-migration to North Africa from Arabia more work is needed to through genetic sequencing ie haplogroups. Lol! These Europeans and their lies. They just can’t help themselves.
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Here is where they are hedging their bet…… The y know they are grasping at straws. He! He! He! Afraid to be caught in a lie. --------------------------- QUOTE: observed in Neolithic farmers from across Europe; consistent with Aegean Neolithic populations, unlike central European Neolithic populations, being the direct descendants of the preceding Mesolithic peoples who inhabited broadly the same region. However, we ****caution against over-interpretation ****of the Aegean Mesolithic mtDNA data; ADDITIONAL genome-level data will be required to ****identify the Mesolithic SOURCE population(s)***** of the early Aegean farmers.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ha! Ha! Ha! These comments were posted on euroblogs. The racialist are in panic mode they don't like the results. Lol! Seems like I was bang on with Asians being very old. I saw the 100% Loschbour ancestry in central Asia in the paper but paid it no mind. Berbers in Canary carry a largepercentage alsoI never knew the Kalmyks are "mongoloid" Asians. Proving what I said before that the (first)meta population that left Africa and entered Europe and Asia were not your typical Yoruban African as some Afro-centric believe. Asians lineage is indeed older than E1b1a.
Quotes: June 6, 2016 at 11:22 PM Blogger Davidski said... @capra internetensis
You can stick your relativism and semantics where the sun don't shine.
Kalmyks do not share any ancestry with Loschbour within any reasonable timeframe. So the results are misleading when they show Kalmyks, from Mongolia, as the samples with the strongest links to indigenous Europeans.
June 6, 2016 at 11:59 PM Blogger Matt said... Questionable why they've left it in. The curious thing here is that they've actually added a lot into their SI Appendix* that's relevant - SI10 shows that using this method (which they go into more detail about, but I don't fully understand yet) moderns are much better matches for all populations.
They had time to improve their PCA as well, but not that.
*and if people want to talk about their D stat analysis of relatedness between ancient farmers, that could be interesting since looks like they have some results with significant Z. They really have added a lot in their SI and in references to their SI in the paper that would be good to discuss here, rather than let that figure overshadow the rest of the paper.
June 7, 2016 at 12:33 AM Blogger capra internetensis said... The study doesn't have anything to do with freaking Kalmyks. It's not trying to identify East Asian admixture or different kinds of hunter-gatherer ancestry; it is trying to discern relatedness to different Neolithic populations. The only thing that graph is saying is that Kalmyks don't have Neolithic ancestry to speak of.
The section that refers to the figure is specifically referring to the Neolithic farmer ancestry. There is a different section discussing hunter-gatherer admixture which uses f4 statistics.
You seem to be deliberately reading it in a misleading way for some bizarre reason.
June 7, 2016 at 12:51 AM Blogger Davidski said... Hang on, but you said this...
The section that refers to the figure is specifically referring to the Neolithic farmer ancestry.
Really, so how come Loschbour-related ancestry in many parts of Turkey is on a par, or almost on a par, with farmer ancestry?
That's just stupid, even if we take into account your comment above, and the fine print you posted.
-------------------- 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 Clyde Winters: [QB] I believe that the original founders of the African Aqualithic were pgymy people.
we are dealing with facts not beliefs. Beliefs are for the religion forum
Dealing with ancient times everything is a guess. There are no eyewitness accounts of what was happening 3kya. .
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Ha! Ha! Ha! These comments were posted on euroblogs. The racialist are in panic mode they don't like the results. Lol! Seems like I was bang on with Asians being very old. I saw the 100% Loschbour ancestry in central Asia in the paper but paid it no mind. Berbers in Canary carry a largepercentage alsoI never knew the Kalmyks are "mongoloid" Asians. Proving what I said before that the (first)meta population that left Africa and entered Europe and Asia were not your typical Yoruban African as some Afro-centric believe. Asians lineage is indeed older than E1b1a.
Quotes: June 6, 2016 at 11:22 PM Blogger Davidski said... @capra internetensis
You can stick your relativism and semantics where the sun don't shine.
Kalmyks do not share any ancestry with Loschbour within any reasonable timeframe. So the results are misleading when they show Kalmyks, from Mongolia, as the samples with the strongest links to indigenous Europeans.
June 6, 2016 at 11:59 PM Blogger Matt said... Questionable why they've left it in. The curious thing here is that they've actually added a lot into their SI Appendix* that's relevant - SI10 shows that using this method (which they go into more detail about, but I don't fully understand yet) moderns are much better matches for all populations.
They had time to improve their PCA as well, but not that.
*and if people want to talk about their D stat analysis of relatedness between ancient farmers, that could be interesting since looks like they have some results with significant Z. They really have added a lot in their SI and in references to their SI in the paper that would be good to discuss here, rather than let that figure overshadow the rest of the paper.
June 7, 2016 at 12:33 AM Blogger capra internetensis said... The study doesn't have anything to do with freaking Kalmyks. It's not trying to identify East Asian admixture or different kinds of hunter-gatherer ancestry; it is trying to discern relatedness to different Neolithic populations. The only thing that graph is saying is that Kalmyks don't have Neolithic ancestry to speak of.
The section that refers to the figure is specifically referring to the Neolithic farmer ancestry. There is a different section discussing hunter-gatherer admixture which uses f4 statistics.
You seem to be deliberately reading it in a misleading way for some bizarre reason.
June 7, 2016 at 12:51 AM Blogger Davidski said... Hang on, but you said this...
The section that refers to the figure is specifically referring to the Neolithic farmer ancestry.
Really, so how come Loschbour-related ancestry in many parts of Turkey is on a par, or almost on a par, with farmer ancestry?
That's just stupid, even if we take into account your comment above, and the fine print you posted.
This is further confirmation of the Central Asian origin of Europeans.
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
The good thing about genetics like most sciences is that there is very little room for ambiguity. aDNA is great because we have a ‘live’ snap shot of who these people were 2000-50000ya!!! There is very little room for BS. Really! Eg we know who the Neolithics are most closely related to. We also know the first Europeans(meta-population) were black and also know Neanderthal who lived for 400,000years were also black. Science levels the playing field. It is a good thing.
-------------------- 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 |
This is further confirmation of the Central Asian origin of Europeans. [/QB]
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The Caves of Europe, were seen as temples by the ancient Blacks of Europe.
The last Ice Age in Europe came suddenly. The Aurignacians carrying haplogroup R, probably sought sanctuary in their caves/temples.
. Since the last Ice Age came suddenly the Blacks were trapped in the caves. In darkness.
In the caves due to the absence of sunlight the Aurignacians lost the melanin in their skin. The melanin left the skin and congregated in the hair.
This is evident when we look at the de-pigmented creatures who lived in the caves. The drawings from the Grotte de Marche shows tha various facial changes that took place among the Proto-Europeans who remained trapped in the caves until after 1400-1200 BC.
Since they remained in the caves the Proto-Europeans at Grotte de Marche probably did not interact with the Blacks of Europe that did not enter the caves and become de-pigmented.
the Aurignacian culture spread across Eurasia. The Europeans exited the caves in Central Asia
According to Dr. Winters Europeans are not indigenous Central Asians. Indigenous Central Asians had been living in Central Asia for tens of thousands of years. The modern Europeans are depigmented Kushites of Europe who went through tunnels which only exited very recently in Central Asia. 1400-1200 BC and their drawings are in the French cave. That is far from being Central Asian.
Modern Europeans are not Central Asians. They are depigmented Kushites, a subset of Africans just like xyymans is saying
Posts: 42935 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: The good thing about genetics like most sciences is that there is very little room for ambiguity. aDNA is great because we have a ‘live’ snap shot of who these people were 2000-50000ya!!! There is very little room for BS. Really! Eg we know who the Neolithics are most closely related to. We also know the first Europeans(meta-population) were black and also know Neanderthal who lived for 400,000years were also black. Science levels the playing field. It is a good thing.
It is okay but it is easily contaminated. Moreover, the researchers can be arbitrary in assigning parentage.
Ins't itinteresting to note that given the many ancient homonids found in Africa, they only analyzed Mota man. They are purposely hiding the true genetic heritage of African and Black people.
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
This is further confirmation of the Central Asian origin of Europeans.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The Caves of Europe, were seen as temples by the ancient Blacks of Europe.
The last Ice Age in Europe came suddenly. The Aurignacians carrying haplogroup R, probably sought sanctuary in their caves/temples.
. Since the last Ice Age came suddenly the Blacks were trapped in the caves. In darkness.
In the caves due to the absence of sunlight the Aurignacians lost the melanin in their skin. The melanin left the skin and congregated in the hair.
This is evident when we look at the de-pigmented creatures who lived in the caves. The drawings from the Grotte de Marche shows tha various facial changes that took place among the Proto-Europeans who remained trapped in the caves until after 1400-1200 BC.
Since they remained in the caves the Proto-Europeans at Grotte de Marche probably did not interact with the Blacks of Europe that did not enter the caves and become de-pigmented.
the Aurignacian culture spread across Eurasia. The Europeans exited the caves in Central Asia
According to Dr. Winters Europeans are not indigenous Central Asians. Indigenous Central Asians had been living in Central Asia for tens of thousands of years. The modern Europeans are depigmented Kushites of Europe who went through tunnels which only exited very recently in Central Asia. 1400-1200 BC and their drawings are in the French cave. That is far from being Central Asian.
Modern Europeans are not Central Asians. They are depigmented Kushites, a subset of Africans just like xyymans is saying [/QB]
LOL. There is no evidence that Modern Europeans or Mongoloids lived in Asia for 10's thousands of years , on the surface . 1400BC is not 10's thousands o f years ago.
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Originally posted by xyyman: The good thing about genetics like most sciences is that there is very little room for ambiguity. aDNA is great because we have a ‘live’ snap shot of who these people were 2000-50000ya!!! There is very little room for BS. Really!
Keita has advised use of a balanced package of analysis, and he is right. Even as you yourself show, the Eurocentrics are sometimes manipulating labels and sampling to present distorted pictures. It would be unwise for folks to hail aDNA or any other DNA analysis as the end-all. DNA is only ONE line of evidence that has to be balanced against crania, limb proportions, dental, historical, cultural and archaeological. If they are diverging widely something is wrong.
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: I am trying to understand his [Irish] position better.
He acknowledges the Badarians were ancestrally representative, but he has been known to push a "Eurasian" style replacement scenario, that is contradicted by the weight of other evidence in the field- such as limb proportions and crania. Perhaps in his lecture he stressed continuity and downplayed his "incoming Caucasoids" notions, which are contradicted by other scholars. A pattern with some of these academics is to play a double game- they say one thing for public consumption, but in the fine detail of their writings they are manipulating models, sampling, reporting and labels to say something else. Keita criticizes Cavalli Sforza et al for the same type of double game- Sforza publicly disavows race, but in his writings, introduces race in new guises. With many of these academics they have to be closely scrutinized. Some of their work may contain more balanced info, but they may bury this in pursuit of some agenda. Some of these people may have no malicious intent but their training makes them automatically reach for Eurocentric approaches.
Keita on Sforza and others double game:
"This gene-language study is further compro- mised by poor representation of the members of some language families and the use of the race constructs, which force boundaries onto a seamless biocultural and historical matrix with extensive geographical parame- ters. Cavalli-Sforza and his colleagues (1988) do not ac- curately represent the Afro-Asiatic family because they exclude Chadic, Omotic, and Cushitic speakers, thereby giving the illusion that Ethiopians are an anomaly, being genetically Africans (but mixed) who also speak the lan- guages of Caucasians (Afro-Asiatic!?) (Armstrong 1990). An evolutionary model explains the geographical range of Afro-Asiatic speakers as one overlaying gradients of genetic differentiation, which a racial model breaks into discrete units that cannot be shown to have ever existed.
Another example of ambiguous branching patterns and clusters within inferred phylogenies is seen in the work of Masatoshi Nei and K. Roychoudhury (1993). Their study, which utilized gene-frequency data from samples derived from the traditional racial constructs, revealed poor support from bootstrap tests for a cluster designated Caucasian and consisting of European and Middle Eastern populations. Although this poor support is more reflective of the inadequacy of typological con- structs and racial thinking, the investigators excluded the non-European samples and subsequently obtained results more satisfying to them. The data in effect were tailored to fit into the traditional racial schema. Other examples of the persistence of racial think- ing may easily be identified. The examples cited above illustrate this problem in otherwise interesting work. The issue is not simply one of terminology. The racial approach clearly does not contribute to an under- standing of biohistorical processes, especially in Africa, which cannot be defined by one trait or cluster of traits, on any level: serogenetic, mtDNA, Y chromosome, nu- clear DNA, odontometric, odontomorphological, cra- niometrie, craniomorphological, hair form, or skin color." --The Persistence of Racial Thinking and the Myth of Racial Divergence, S. O. Y. Keita, Rick A. Kittles, American Anthropologist, New Series, Vol. 99, No. 3 (Sep., 1997), pp. 534-544
In older work, the same pattern of Eurocentric manipulation emerges. Reports from the field exclude or downplay "negroid" samples
"Nutter (1958), using the Penrose statistic, demonstrated that Nagada I and Badari crania, both regarded as Negroid, were almost identical and that these were most similar to the Negroid Nubian series from Kerma studied by Collett (1933). [Collett, not accepting variability, excluded "clear negro" crania found in the Kerma series from her analysis, as did Morant (1925), implying that they were foreign.].. --Keita, S. O. Y, 1995. "A brief review of studies and comments on ancient Egyptian biological relationships,
Another method of Eurocentric manipulation is to mislabel the negro data as "Mediterranean"
"Analyses of Egyptian crania are numerous. Vercoutter (1978) notes that ancient Egyptian crania have frequently all been "lumped (implicitly or explicitly) as Mediterranean, although Negroid remains are recorded in substantial numbers by many workers... --S.O.Y Keita, "Studies of Ancient Crania From Northern Africa
^^All the above old abuses and biases, including the "true negro" stereotype, and exclusion and manipulation of sampling, has been carried over into DNA studies.
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Agreed. You are bang on with the games and labels used.
“True negro”, selective sampling, Mediterranean=”Negroid” . Data manipulation and concealment. Labeling manipualtion. Frequency vs exclusivity games. Or Diversity vs Frequency. I am unto all their games.
But the fact is there are no races of humanity, fortunately or is it unfortunately. Example, the new thread by Mike. Hoffmeyr is African but most likely NOT related to “most modern Africans” . He is probably more related to La Brana and the OOA meta-population.
When his DNA is pulled I would not be surprised he has MORE archaic(Neanderthal/Denisovan) ancestry than modern Africans. Why? Because that is how “substructure” works.
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: Originally posted by xyyman: The good thing about genetics like most sciences is that there is very little room for ambiguity. aDNA is great because we have a ‘live’ snap shot of who these people were 2000-50000ya!!! There is very little room for BS. Really!
Keita has advised use of a balanced package of analysis, and he is right. Even as you yourself show, the Eurocentrics are sometimes manipulating labels and sampling to present distorted pictures. It would be unwise for folks to hail aDNA or any other DNA analysis as the end-all. DNA is only ONE line of evidence that has to be balanced against crania, limb proportions, dental, historical, cultural and archaeological. If they are diverging widely something is wrong.
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: I am trying to understand his [Irish] position better.
He acknowledges the Badarians were ancestrally representative, but he has been known to push a "Eurasian" style replacement scenario, that is contradicted by the weight of other evidence in the field- such as limb proportions and crania. Perhaps in his lecture he stressed continuity and downplayed his "incoming Caucasoids" notions, which are contradicted by other scholars. A pattern with some of these academics is to play a double game- they say one thing for public consumption, but in the fine detail of their writings they are manipulating models, sampling, reporting and labels to say something else. Keita criticizes Cavalli Sforza et al for the same type of double game- Sforza publicly disavows race, but in his writings, introduces race in new guises. With many of these academics they have to be closely scrutinized. Some of their work may contain more balanced info, but they may bury this in pursuit of some agenda. Some of these people may have no malicious intent but their training makes them automatically reach for Eurocentric approaches.
Keita on Sforza and others double game:
"This gene-language study is further compro- mised by poor representation of the members of some language families and the use of the race constructs, which force boundaries onto a seamless biocultural and historical matrix with extensive geographical parame- ters. Cavalli-Sforza and his colleagues (1988) do not ac- curately represent the Afro-Asiatic family because they exclude Chadic, Omotic, and Cushitic speakers, thereby giving the illusion that Ethiopians are an anomaly, being genetically Africans (but mixed) who also speak the lan- guages of Caucasians (Afro-Asiatic!?) (Armstrong 1990). An evolutionary model explains the geographical range of Afro-Asiatic speakers as one overlaying gradients of genetic differentiation, which a racial model breaks into discrete units that cannot be shown to have ever existed.
Another example of ambiguous branching patterns and clusters within inferred phylogenies is seen in the work of Masatoshi Nei and K. Roychoudhury (1993). Their study, which utilized gene-frequency data from samples derived from the traditional racial constructs, revealed poor support from bootstrap tests for a cluster designated Caucasian and consisting of European and Middle Eastern populations. Although this poor support is more reflective of the inadequacy of typological con- structs and racial thinking, the investigators excluded the non-European samples and subsequently obtained results more satisfying to them. The data in effect were tailored to fit into the traditional racial schema. Other examples of the persistence of racial think- ing may easily be identified. The examples cited above illustrate this problem in otherwise interesting work. The issue is not simply one of terminology. The racial approach clearly does not contribute to an under- standing of biohistorical processes, especially in Africa, which cannot be defined by one trait or cluster of traits, on any level: serogenetic, mtDNA, Y chromosome, nu- clear DNA, odontometric, odontomorphological, cra- niometrie, craniomorphological, hair form, or skin color." --The Persistence of Racial Thinking and the Myth of Racial Divergence, S. O. Y. Keita, Rick A. Kittles, American Anthropologist, New Series, Vol. 99, No. 3 (Sep., 1997), pp. 534-544
In older work, the same pattern of Eurocentric manipulation emerges. Reports from the field exclude or downplay "negroid" samples
"Nutter (1958), using the Penrose statistic, demonstrated that Nagada I and Badari crania, both regarded as Negroid, were almost identical and that these were most similar to the Negroid Nubian series from Kerma studied by Collett (1933). [Collett, not accepting variability, excluded "clear negro" crania found in the Kerma series from her analysis, as did Morant (1925), implying that they were foreign.].. --Keita, S. O. Y, 1995. "A brief review of studies and comments on ancient Egyptian biological relationships,
Another method of Eurocentric manipulation is to mislabel the negro data as "Mediterranean"
"Analyses of Egyptian crania are numerous. Vercoutter (1978) notes that ancient Egyptian crania have frequently all been "lumped (implicitly or explicitly) as Mediterranean, although Negroid remains are recorded in substantial numbers by many workers... --S.O.Y Keita, "Studies of Ancient Crania From Northern Africa
[/QB]
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Now speaking about games and manipulating data. One thing I have noticed but others may not…is that they are no longer finding mtDNa hg-L in a DNA in Europe. Some of the earlier works on aDNA showed L being present in ancient Europe. Eg in the Canary Islands and Iberia and Italy. Gonzalez/Fernandez in her thesis posted on ESR found as much as 50% mtDNA L in Iberia ancients. She also found mtDNA L in The 8000yo Neolithics in the Levant(posted in ESR). Now….nothing! Yes, I admit mtDNA H makes more sense but hg-L was also present. What gives Euro-liars? Are they concealing data?
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
This is further confirmation of the Central Asian origin of Europeans.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The Caves of Europe, were seen as temples by the ancient Blacks of Europe.
The last Ice Age in Europe came suddenly. The Aurignacians carrying haplogroup R, probably sought sanctuary in their caves/temples.
. Since the last Ice Age came suddenly the Blacks were trapped in the caves. In darkness.
In the caves due to the absence of sunlight the Aurignacians lost the melanin in their skin. The melanin left the skin and congregated in the hair.
This is evident when we look at the de-pigmented creatures who lived in the caves. The drawings from the Grotte de Marche shows tha various facial changes that took place among the Proto-Europeans who remained trapped in the caves until after 1400-1200 BC.
Since they remained in the caves the Proto-Europeans at Grotte de Marche probably did not interact with the Blacks of Europe that did not enter the caves and become de-pigmented.
the Aurignacian culture spread across Eurasia. The Europeans exited the caves in Central Asia
According to Dr. Winters Europeans are not indigenous Central Asians. Indigenous Central Asians had been living in Central Asia for tens of thousands of years. The modern Europeans are depigmented Kushites of Europe who went through tunnels which only exited very recently in Central Asia. 1400-1200 BC and their drawings are in the French cave. That is far from being Central Asian.
Modern Europeans are not Central Asians. They are depigmented Kushites, a subset of Africans just like xyymans is saying
LOL. There is no evidence that Modern Europeans or Mongoloids lived in Asia for 10's thousands of years , on the surface . 1400BC is not 10's thousands o f years ago. [/QB]
Right, according to Dr. Winters the ancestors of modern Europeans had been living inside caves 17,000 years ago in a France in a similar fashion to the cave dwelling Homo naledi of South Africa
Posts: 42935 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Now speaking about games and manipulating data. One thing I have noticed but others may not…is that they are no longer finding mtDNa hg-L in a DNA in Europe. Some of the earlier works on aDNA showed L being present in ancient Europe. Eg in the Canary Islands and Iberia and Italy. Gonzalez/Fernandez in her thesis posted on ESR found as much as 50% mtDNA L in Iberia ancients. She also found mtDNA L in The 8000yo Neolithics in the Levant(posted in ESR). Now….nothing! Yes, I admit mtDNA H makes more sense but hg-L was also present. What gives Euro-liars? Are they concealing data?
Yea. It's all your fault. You keep showing the lies and they either have to refuse to publish all of their results or just mention in passing important points that dispute their hypotheses and findings. Keep up the great work.
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
A Decreasing Gradient of 374F Allele Frequencies in the Skin Pigmentation Gene SLC45A2, from the North of West Europe to North Africa - Gérard Lucotte
Abstract The 374F mutation in the SLC45A2 gene, encoding the membrane-associated transporter protein (MATP) that plays an important role in melanin synthesis, has been suggested to be associated with skin color in Caucasians. In this study, the detailed distribution of the 374F allele has been investigated in 2063 unrelated subjects from 18 European and three North African populations. The highest allele frequency is observed in Denmark (0.980), and the lowest frequencies are observed in Tunisia (0.610) and in Morocco (0.691). A SIGNIFICANT LATITUDINAL CLINE in 374F allele frequencies was observed, ranging from the north of West Europe to North Africa (r = 0.869). The results confirm that the distribution of the 374F allele may reflect the ultraviolet radiation level and can be associated with skin color variation in these regions.
-------------------- 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 |
The human SLC45A2 gene is responsible for oculocutaneous albinism type 4 (OCA4), for which several mutations have been identified in some patients; thus it has been established that the SLC45A2 gene plays a role in pigmentation (Fukamachi et al. 2001; Newton et al. 2001; Inagaki et al. 2004; Rundshagen et al. 2004).
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: But not Dravidian Albino---type 4?
This explains the mental disorders....just saying
Quote:
The human SLC45A2 gene is responsible for oculocutaneous albinism type 4 (OCA4), for which several mutations have been identified in some patients; thus it has been established that the SLC45A2 gene plays a role in pigmentation (Fukamachi et al. 2001; Newton et al. 2001; Inagaki et al. 2004; Rundshagen et al. 2004).
OCA4 is rare outside Japan. You have a quote up making no mention of a link between OCA 4 and mental disorders, you made that up obviously, racist
Posts: 42935 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Come one Lioness. I am the furthest from a racist or racialist. Stop over-reacting. You white people always accuse us of being too emotional when it is in fact you are the ones.
To be honest most of my colleagues and the few friends I have are white. There are good white people. But there are also many insane and racist white people many are closet racist. Racism is a product of ignorance. ie lack of knowledge and fear of the unknown. I am far from that. I am just making a scientific observation. The OCA4 thing is new to me. I knew about OCA2 and the linkage disequilibrium. MK opened that discussion one time.
As I told Dhoxie. There is a simple solution and the Germans are working on it.....
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: But not Dravidian Albino---type 4?
This explains the mental disorders....just saying
Quote:
The human SLC45A2 gene is responsible for oculocutaneous albinism type 4 (OCA4), for which several mutations have been identified in some patients; thus it has been established that the SLC45A2 gene plays a role in pigmentation (Fukamachi et al. 2001; Newton et al. 2001; Inagaki et al. 2004; Rundshagen et al. 2004).
OCA4 is rare outside Japan. You have a quote up making no mention of a link between OCA 4 and mental disorders, you made that up obviously, racist
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Melanin or black made us human. Lack of melanin..well....you know the rest
Remember Tunisians carry most founder haplotype of the many ailment that dominate European genes. That is due to inbreeding manifested through Genetic surfing ie Isolation By distance. Dr Winters have a problem with Genetic surfing but the authors got it correct.
I am here to help white people. Admit the truth and we can move on from there and solve their problems. It is that simple. denial is again is one of their many psychosis.
I am here to help.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
listen. I have a problem with you calling me racist. I AM NOT!!!!
I am only stating a scientific fact. There are benefits to melanin. Which has a lot to do with cognitive ability and mental stability.
All the genetic scientist know that Euroepans are depigmented Africans. They are just going in circles refusing to admit it. But it makes sense because only 7 miles separate Africa from Europe. If I know that THEY do too. That is why under the skin Euroepans are as much as 80% "new" African. Don’t believe me? Then ask Sergi, Coon, Lazaridis, Rosenberg and many others.
They are NOT Dravidian Albinos
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: listen. I have a problem with you calling me racist. I AM NOT!!!!
I am only stating a scientific fact. There are benefits to melanin. Which has a lot to do with cognitive ability and mental stability.
The idea that people with light skin have impaired cognitive ability and mental stability due to having less melanin in their skin is false and racist. Therefore you are a lying racist
Posts: 42935 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: [QB] Melanin or black made us human. Lack of melanin..well....you know the rest
^ racist confirmed
Does melanin make someone racist? Didn't melanin led to the survival of mankind?
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: listen. I have a problem with you calling me racist. I AM NOT!!!!
I am only stating a scientific fact. There are benefits to melanin. Which has a lot to do with cognitive ability and mental stability.
All the genetic scientist know that Euroepans are depigmented Africans. They are just going in circles refusing to admit it. But it makes sense because only 7 miles separate Africa from Europe. If I know that THEY do too. That is why under the skin Euroepans are as much as 80% "new" African. Don’t believe me? Then ask Sergi, Coon, Lazaridis, Rosenberg and many others.
They are NOT Dravidian Albinos
No not really! It's a PRETTY MUCH A FACT THAT VARIOUS NUMBERS OF THEM ARE DRAVIDIAN ALBINO'S AND THE HISTORICAL AND GENETIC RECORD PROVES THAT!
There were massive migrations from Central Asia and Siberia, INTO EUROPE starting from near the Neolithic to the fall of the Roman empire of Dravidian type albino's. We have Herodotus, Tacitus, Jordanes, Strabo, Pliny etc etc all saying and TELLING ENTIRE ACCOUNTS OF DRAVIDIAN TYPE ALBINO'S ENTERING EUROPE, and we have all sorts of other evidence confirming that as well.
And Dravidian albino's look EXACTLY, I MEAN EXACTLY like White Europeans from Eastern, Central, and North-Eastern Europe; the zones in Europe that was subject historically to the most migrations INTO EUROPE FROM THE STEPPES OF SIBERIA AND CENTRAL ASIA AND WHERE R1A IS THE MOST DOMINANT GENETICALLY IN EUROPE!
THESE ARE DRAVIDIAN ALBINO'S!
^^^Again, indistinguishable from many White Europeans TODAY!
There are genetic variations in Europe, in the different quadrants of Europe, R1a is very dominant in Eastern Europe while R1b is dominant in the West, while Central Europe is evenly divided between the two; the looks in Europe differ, phenotype and skeleton wise when you go from Western to Eastern to Northern to Southern Europe; which means that Europe is basically a hodge podge of different types of albino's that moved and settled there and different peoples moving there at different times.
The only conclusion has to be then, THAT MODERN WHITE EUROPEANS ARE INFACT THE HYBRIDS OF BOTH AFRICAN AND DRAVIDIAN ALBINO'S BREEDING TOGETHER IN DIFFERING % ACROSS THE DIFFERENT REGIONS OF EUROPE IN DIFFERENT TIME PERIODS! That is what the evidence says!
You simply don't want to ACCEPT BASIC ATTESTED AND RECORDED FACTUAL HISTORICAL TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE, because you have a personal agenda; and you want to disregard HISTORICAL FACTS, since you can't accept anything that deviates from your views and your idiotic blind agenda and your old and obsolete easily refutable and flawed fallacious theories, regarding this subject matter.
Posts: 1558 | From: US | Registered: Sep 2015
| IP: Logged |
posted
I rely on SCIENTIFIC studies not picture spamming to make my point. Neither do I rely on "documented" history. Science is proving what is written in these European 'history" books are mostly lies. Europeans are notorious liars and has an adverse reaction to reality.
-------------------- 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
Now that make more sense. Yes, modern Europeans are an hybrid of the first OOA meta-population related to the black Dravidians and Australian type peoples(Lazaridis, Mathisien and others) AND the new incoming Neolithic Africans. But the OCA related genes (SLC45A2 etc) did not originate from the Dravidian branch. It is a Neolithic phenomenon. Up to 6000ya the meta-population of Europe was black skinned. And there was no “migration” from Asia. It is all nonsense. The meta-population path was through North Africa across Iberia and Sicily. That is why Canary Islanders and North Africans carry such a high frequency of Loschbour “ancestry” ie Loschbour related genes.
**The only conclusion has to be then, THAT MODERN WHITE EUROPEANS ARE INFACT THE HYBRIDS OF BOTH AFRICAN AND DRAVIDIAN ALBINO'S BREEDING TOGETHER IN DIFFERING % ACROSS THE DIFFERENT REGIONS OF EUROPE IN DIFFERENT TIME PERIODS! That is what the evidence says!**
-------------------- 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: Now that make more sense. Yes, modern Europeans are an hybrid of the first OOA meta-population related to the black Dravidians...
stop the "dravidian" pseudoscience bullshit
Posts: 42935 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: I rely on SCIENTIFIC studies not picture spamming to make my point. Neither do I rely on "documented" history. Science is proving what is written in these European 'history" books are mostly lies. Europeans are notorious liars and has an adverse reaction to reality.
No, it's not "picture spamming", it's "evidence spamming". And Science is basically proving what I'm saying along with HISTORICALLY RECORDED EVIDENCE WHICH IS JUST AS IMPORTANT!
When you are disregarding, DIRECT AND PHYSICAL EVIDENCE, as well AS REAL RECORDED HISTORICAL EVIDENCE, because it doesn't suit your personal agenda, you are engaging in all types of logical fallacies from composition fallacy to confirmation bias to non-sequitar etc etc.
And Herodotus, Strabo, Pliny the Elder, Tacitus, Jordanes are not modern "Eurocentric historians", and it's questionable whether they were actually "white" or not.
However they are pretty much accurate sources, as far as Ancient history goes, since their records are written sources DATING TO BEFORE THE EUROPEAN AGE OF EXPANSION AND COLONIAL IMPERIAL AGE! And so far, research and "science", has actually been on par w/ their writings, and has been proving their writings, since people began researching INTO THEM!
You simply don't want to accept anything that deviates, from your old and fallacious and obsolete views on the topic, and you don't really want to accept "reality", "evidence" and the "facts"; and you are twisting and abusing the word "science", for your own false beliefs and claims; claims which can be easily refuted and contested, when your false arguments actually is distant from the ACTUAL scientific method, disregards empiricism and authenticity regarding all possible evidence, and LOGIC!
What you are simply doing is cherry picking and distorting or intentionally ignoring ACTUAL EVIDENCE FROM ALL SOURCES, and then picking the ones that you like and suits your blind personal agenda's and views, while disregarding the obvious others; then you go slapping together those stuff that you like and cherrypicked, then you go shouting that all that slapped together/cherry picked distorted stuff is the truth and everyone else that disagrees or contests that stuff, is wrong using the same old idiotic and obviously holed flawed arguments to support that stuff repeatedly when questioned.
Sorry but it's pretty much a fact at this point that modern White Europeans are basically, for the vast majority of Central, Northern and Eastern Europe genetically and population wise, White Eurasians from Central/Southern Asia and Siberia; and these White Eurasians are basically Dravidian albino's that Mike has mentioned repeatedly....
Posts: 1558 | From: US | Registered: Sep 2015
| IP: Logged |
Sorry but it's pretty much a fact at this point that modern White Europeans are basically, for the vast majority of Central, Northern and Eastern Europe genetically and population wise, White Eurasians from Central/Southern Asia and Siberia; and these White Eurasians are basically Dravidian albino's that Mike has mentioned repeatedly.... [/QB]
^^^ this shyt is seriously stupid. They are simultaneously Siberians and Indians
Posts: 42935 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Now that make more sense. Yes, modern Europeans are an hybrid of the first OOA meta-population related to the black Dravidians...
stop the "dravidian" pseudoscience bullshit
Not Pseudo-science, but FACTS as anyone w/ a WORKING, pair of eyes can see in this thread!
Posts: 1558 | From: US | Registered: Sep 2015
| IP: Logged |
posted
stop wasting bandwith, you have no data and if you had it would not understand it You are a racial propagandist
Posts: 42935 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic