What DNATribes is trying to determine this month is “origin” of EEF and thus the origin of the major genetic component found in Europe today. Specifically by analyzing two populations West Asia(Levant) and Aegan(greek) populations.
The SNP and STR analysis agree. Berbers/indigenous North Africanas are the major ancestral group.
Quote: ‘’’’Because these components are found in all studied Aegean and West Asian regions, they might to some degree reflect traces of EEF populations ***ANCESTRAL to both ****Europeans and West Asians.’’’’
Quote: ‘’’’ As with STR components (discussed in the previous section of this article), Berber-North African percentages are expressed for all studied SNP clusters. ’’’’
posted
Arabia is an extension of Africa. Don't believe me? See what DNATribes think on ESR. Over 120 hits within 1 day.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
xyyman do you realize that the first farmers in Europe were not the original inhabitants of Europe? They were migrants who entered Europe about 7,500 years ago? think man think
recap:
quote: We sequenced genomes from a ∼7,000 year old early farmer from Stuttgart in Germany, an ∼8,000 year old hunter-gatherer from Luxembourg, and seven ∼8,000 year old hunter-gatherers from southern Sweden. We analyzed these data together with other ancient genomes and 2,345 contemporary humans to show that the great majority of present-day Europeans derive from at least three highly differentiated populations: West European Hunter-Gatherers (WHG), who contributed ancestry to all Europeans but not to Near Easterners; Ancient North Eurasians (ANE), who were most closely related to Upper Paleolithic Siberians and contributed to both Europeans and Near Easterners; and Early European Farmers (EEF), who were mainly of Near Eastern origin but also harbored WHG-related ancestry. We model these populations' deep relationships and show that EEF had ∼44% ancestry from a "Basal Eurasian" lineage that split prior to the diversification of all other non-African lineages.
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Arabia is an extension of Africa. Don't believe me? See what DNATribes think on ESR. Over 120 hits within 1 day.
Arabia is an extension of what part of Africa? What African country plays great importance in this extension?
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Arabia is an extension of Africa. Don't believe me? See what DNATribes think on ESR. Over 120 hits within 1 day.
Arabia is an extension of what part of Africa? What African country plays great importance in this extension?
I am surprised by your question. Goes to show…..
Quote from the paper : - However, ******Yemeni****** sequences, IN CONTRAST to their clustering together with Ethiopian and Egyptian populations in the MDS plot (fig. 3), show GREATER AFFILIATION to haplotypes detected in Mozambique. The haplotype sharing with Mozambique accounts for 23% of the total and 49% of haplogroup L0–L5 lineages among Yemenis. The lack of M and N lineages in the Mozambique sample is the ONLY apparent factor that separates it from Yemenis in the MDS plot. It should be noted here that the percentage of shared lineages between Yemeni and Mozambique mtDNAs cannot be taken as a measure of actual admixture proportion, because there is a substantial fraction of uninformative haplotypes in both samples. These include either matches or the lack of matches, both in northeastern and southeastern African populations, that probably reflect the incomplete sampling of Africa. Compared with Bantu speakers from southeastern Africa, [/b]the Ethiopian contribution to the Yemeni mtDNA pool can be considered relatively minor, [/b]since the shared haplotypes account for just 9% of the total variation.
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Europe ends in the Sahara.. and Yemen (sic).
You mean this?
Caucasoid, -green Congoid, -yellow Capoid, (Khosian) -purple Mongoloid,- blue Australoid.- red
Distribution of Coon's "five races" after the end of the Pleistocene. This is the second half of the combination of two maps numbered "Map 13", labelled "Pleistocene" and "Early Post-Pleistocene". Original caption: "This schematic map shows the distribution of the five subspecies of Homo during most of the Pleistocene, from 500,000 to 10,000 years ago. This distribution matches that on the diagram in Chapter 1. Of the five subspecies, the Congoid was the most isolated; it was in contact with only one other, the Capoid, then resident in North Africa. The second map shows what happened at the end of the Pleistocene, when the Mongoloids and Caucasoids expanded and burst out of their territories. The Mongoloids entered and inhabited America, and extended their domain southward into Southeast Asia and Indonesia, while the Australoids crossed Wallace's Line and occupied Australia and New Guinea. The Caucasoids thrust northward. More significantly, they drove the Capoids out of North Africa and occupied the White Highlands of Kenya and Tanganyika. The Congoids were reduced to a small part of their earlier domain, including the Congo forests and the lands to the north, where they later evolved rapidly and spread, as Negroes, over much of Africa."
quote:
"Meanwhile we may note that a detailed analysis of 571 modern Negro crania, made by advanced mathematical techniques, has shown that these crania gravitate between two poles, a Mediterranean Caucasoid and a Pygmy one. The former type is again divisible into an ordinary Mediterranean and a Western Asian type, which suggests more than a single northern point of origin for the Caucasoid element. As we shall in greater detail in Chapter 8 and 9, the Negroes resemble Caucasoids closely a number of genetic traits that are inherited in a simple fashion. Examples of these are fingerprints, types of earwax, and the major blood groups. The Negroes also have some of the same local, predominantly African, blood types as the Pygmies. " This evidence suggests that the Negroes are not a primary sub-species but rather a product of mixture between invading Caucasoids and Pygmies who lived on the edges of the forest, which at the end of the Pleistocene extended farther north and east than it does now.
The Living Races of Man by Carleton S. Coon
Caucasoid, -green Congoid, -yellow Capoid, (Khosian) -purple Mongoloid,- blue Australoid.- red
This is the first half of the combination of two maps numbered "Map 13", labelled "Pleistocene" and "Early Post-Pleistocene". Original caption: "This schematic map shows the distribution of the five subspecies of Homo during most of the Pleistocene, from 500,000 to 10,000 years ago. This distribution matches that on the diagram in Chapter 1. Of the five subspecies, the Congoid was the most isolated; it was in contact with only one other, the Capoid, then resident in North Africa. The second map shows what happened at the end of the Pleistocene, when the Mongoloids and Caucasoids expanded and burst out of their territories. The Mongoloids entered and inhabited America, and extended their domain southward into Southeast Asia and Indonesia, while the Australoids crossed Wallace's Line and occupied Australia and New Guinea. The Caucasoids thrust northward. More significantly, they drove the Capoids out of North Africa and occupied the White Highlands of Kenya and Tanganyika. The Congoids were reduced to a small part of their earlier domain, including the Congo forests and the lands to the north, where they later evolved rapidly and spread, as Negroes, over much of Africa."
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Arabia is an extension of Africa. Don't believe me? See what DNATribes think on ESR. Over 120 hits within 1 day.
Arabia is an extension of what part of Africa? What African country plays great importance in this extension?
I am surprised by your question. Goes to show…..
Quote from the paper : - However, ******Yemeni****** sequences, IN CONTRAST to their clustering together with Ethiopian and Egyptian populations in the MDS plot (fig. 3), show GREATER AFFILIATION to haplotypes detected in Mozambique. The haplotype sharing with Mozambique accounts for 23% of the total and 49% of haplogroup L0–L5 lineages among Yemenis. The lack of M and N lineages in the Mozambique sample is the ONLY apparent factor that separates it from Yemenis in the MDS plot. It should be noted here that the percentage of shared lineages between Yemeni and Mozambique mtDNAs cannot be taken as a measure of actual admixture proportion, because there is a substantial fraction of uninformative haplotypes in both samples. These include either matches or the lack of matches, both in northeastern and southeastern African populations, that probably reflect the incomplete sampling of Africa. Compared with Bantu speakers from southeastern Africa, [/b]the Ethiopian contribution to the Yemeni mtDNA pool can be considered relatively minor, [/b]since the shared haplotypes account for just 9% of the total variation.
Its a simple question that you didnt answer. I will ask it again:
quote: Arabia is an extension of what part of Africa? What African country plays great importance in this extension?
These are questions that can be answered with as little as a few words. I find it interesting how you skirt around it.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
[[[[The haplotype sharing with Mozambique accounts for 23% of the total and 49% of haplogroup L0–L5 lineages among Yemenis.]]]]
Yemen is in Arabia, Mozambique is in South Eastern Africa North Africa is in Africa, Saudi Arabia is in Arabia.
English is your first language?
Don't believe me. Look.
quote:Originally posted by xyyman:
quote:Originally posted by beyoku:
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: [qb] Arabia is an extension of Africa. Don't believe me? See what DNATribes think on ESR. Over 120 hits within 1 day.
Arabia is an extension of what part of Africa? What African country plays great importance in this extension?
I am surprised by your question. Goes to show…..
Quote from the paper : - However, ******Yemeni****** sequences, IN CONTRAST to their clustering together with Ethiopian and Egyptian populations in the MDS plot (fig. 3), show GREATER AFFILIATION to haplotypes detected in Mozambique. The haplotype sharing with Mozambique accounts for 23% of the total and 49% of haplogroup L0–L5 lineages among Yemenis. The lack of M and N lineages in the Mozambique sample is the ONLY apparent factor that separates it from Yemenis in the MDS plot. It should be noted here that the percentage of shared lineages between Yemeni and Mozambique mtDNAs cannot be taken as a measure of actual admixture proportion, because there is a substantial fraction of uninformative haplotypes in both samples. These include either matches or the lack of matches, both in northeastern and southeastern African populations, that probably reflect the incomplete sampling of Africa. Compared with Bantu speakers from southeastern Africa, [/b]the Ethiopian contribution to the Yemeni mtDNA pool can be considered relatively minor, since the shared haplotypes account for just 9% of the total variation.
posted
See. That's the problem with you and your buddy. Lack of true intelligence.
Do you understand what the authors premising here?
Haplopgroup "frequency" MDS plots are outdated. It is intended to be deceptive. Achilli and Torronni used it back in the late 1990's to support their Refugia expansion theory. It is now outdated although some authors still toy with it. I am unto their games now.
eg That recent paper posted in Dienekess on the farmers. Do you know what they are doing? They tried a rebuttal on Lazaridis et al. Lazaridis et al posit EEF ultimately in Africa. These authors tried putting EEF back in the "near East", by mathemetical manipulation. When they did a MDS plot it was ONLY within the ancient populations. But they switched to PCA frequency when comparing the first farmers with modern populations.
I am still open to that tag team.
Class is over.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness and xyyman,: [QB] xyyman do you realize that the first farmers in Europe were not the original inhabitants of Europe? They were migrants who entered Europe about 7,500 years ago? think man think
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: I agreed with you over three years ago
quote:Originally posted by the lioness and xyyman,: [QB] xyyman do you realize that the first farmers in Europe were not the original inhabitants of Europe? They were migrants who entered Europe about 7,500 years ago? think man think
And they are the EEF
Do you realize they could not have come from NA since there was no farming there at that time?
quote:Originally posted by xyyman:
Lazaridis et al posit EEF ultimately in Africa.
No they don't put up a quote
quote:Originally posted by xyyman:
These authors tried putting EEF back in the "near East", by mathemetical manipulation.
It's hard to keep up with your wrongness, EEF genomes have only been found in North and Central Europe
Posts: 42925 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Xyyman you are still dancing around the issue. I asked a specific question. Yemen is not the whole of Arabia. I am not even asking about Arabia. I am asking which part of Africa is the extension of Arabia? Is Mozambique your final answer? Is that what you are getting at? you mention Lizardis and EFF.... It's African? OK, Where in Africa would you say it comes from. .?
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Bump. This question is highly relevant because, by definition, it clarifies the genetic composition of the the Sahara and African Red Sea Coast indigenes who have always been interacting with Arabs, Levantines and Mesopotamians, since the UP.
Watch as Xyyman will continue to duck the question. He knows what's at stake. That's why he's tapdancing around this very basic question and sowing confusion about Bantu-Yemen mtDNA haplotype sharing. Not gonna work.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
Notice what DNAtribes did? They have a conflicted mind. Total confused and unsure how to deal with the data they are discovering.
They agree that EEF source population is North Africa but leave it out of their chart. They are afraid to place EEF in Africa. EEF should be placed IN Africa also. But instead they only have EEF in Arabia.
Instead they extend Africa into Arabia then placed EEF IN Arabia.
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: Xyyman you are still dancing around the issue. I asked a specific question. Yemen is not the whole of Arabia. I am not even asking about Arabia. I am asking which part of Africa is the extension of Arabia? Is Mozambique your final answer? Is that what you are getting at? you mention Lizardis and EFF.... It's African? OK, Where in Africa would you say it comes from. .?
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Xyyman: Notice what DNAtribes did? They have a conflicted mind. Total confused and unsure how to deal with the data they are discovering.
They agree that EEF source population is North Africa but leave it out of their chart. They are afraid to place EEF in Africa. EEF should be placed IN Africa also. But instead they only have EEF in Arabia.
Other than the fact that you have yet to answer Beyoku's question without skirting around it and changing the topic, do you even know what the abbreviation 'EEF' means? If so, why would you look for it in Africa?
posted
Dodge. There is a way that you can answer it. Like a normal congative human. I ask you the time and you answer with the color "Red".
NAME the region that is the extension. NAME the country that is most important in that region.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
It is becoming more apparent there is a communication problem. I am not going to make it easy for you both. Read on.
Continuing ...
As I said. mtDNA H/V is NOT European. And they knew that over two decades ago. Europeans are an amalgam of first OOA and recent African Neolithic migrants(EEF).
Read more on ESR -- -
An mtDNA Analysis in Ancient Basque Populations
The absence of haplogroup V in the prehistoric samples analyzed CONFLICTS with the hypothesis proposed by Torroni et al., in which haplogroup V is considered as an mtDNA marker for a major Paleolithic population expansion from southwestern Europe, occurring ∼10,000-15,000 years before the present (YBP).
Therefore, the date of origin of haplogroup V might be MORE RECENT than that proposed by Torroni et al. (1998), which would account for its absence in ancient samples and would cast doubt on the idea that these authors have proposed with regard to the Paleolithic expansion.
posted
BTW - On the DNATribes chart I posted above. You do understand why they dropped label "Sahara-Arabia " like what they used a year ago? They have now grouped Africa and Arabia together. Extending Africa's boundary INTO Arabia.
Hint: - See that TreeMix chart I posted previously.
They are all going to come xyyman's way. (Waiting whistling and twiddling my thumbs).
I should be paided for this stuff. Sammi! Neal! I want a cut. He! He! He!
-------------------- 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
The question that should "oddle your noodles" is - what are the 2 "non-Caucasian" mtDNA hg observed in the ancient Basque populations after all even X was claimed as Caucasian? Maybe Beyoku can "contact" his geneticist informants and they will tell him(sic)
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: It is becoming more apparent there is a communication problem. I am not going to make it easy for you both. Read on.
Continuing ...
As I said. mtDNA H/V is NOT European. And they knew that over two decades ago. Europeans are an amalgam of first OOA and recent African Neolithic migrants(EEF).
Read more on ESR -- -
An mtDNA Analysis in Ancient Basque Populations
The absence of haplogroup V in the prehistoric samples analyzed CONFLICTS with the hypothesis proposed by Torroni et al., in which haplogroup V is considered as an mtDNA marker for a major Paleolithic population expansion from southwestern Europe, occurring ∼10,000-15,000 years before the present (YBP).
Therefore, the date of origin of haplogroup V might be MORE RECENT than that proposed by Torroni et al. (1998), which would account for its absence in ancient samples and would cast doubt on the idea that these authors have proposed with regard to the Paleolithic expansion.
OH! the greatest frequency for hg-H is in the Taureg of Africa. And the greatest diversity is is a toss-up between Africa and Arabia. Your point?
I can back up ALL that I said..but you know that already. But we went over this already. Any new information?
-------------------- 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 |
Maybe I shouldn't put up these DNA Tribes charts anymore. They lead to a lot of confusion, I fault DNA tribes
xyyman says Arabia is an extension of Africa due to this chart
When you look at the Arabia line it says
26.1% Horn of Africa 30.3% North Africa
Add that up xyyman says Arabs are 56.4% African, therfore Arabia is an extension of Africa
The problem is when we look at these conponents each one is not all African, example the Horn:
^ So here they say the Horn is 42.3% African But that means when they are saying that Arabia is 26.1% Horn of Africa that 26.1% is not all African only 42.3% of it is
Similarly with DNA Tribes heading "North Africa" According to DNA Tribes "North Africa" is comprised of indigenous African ancestry and large amounts of non-African ancestry, more dilution
To understand this you have to look at peer reviewed scientific articles to understand the context of their percentages
Interestingly the above chart also lists Arabian as 26.1 % Indus Valley, strangely the exact same % as Horn African
Another big thing which confuses the issue is that in the above chart the listing is "Arabian" -not ARABIA
Arab (Iraq) (103) Arab (Israel) (227) Arab (Morocco) (54) Arab (Morocco) (94)
So when they list Arabian on the above chart it is not talking only of Arabia
xyyman ask yourself why do they have Arabs in Morocco?
If your theory was correct they would all be Africans
Aplogists for Islamic conquest of North Africa argue that no military force was involved at all But if you look at history they accomplished this with Arab armies of tens of thousands. Often when large armies come into small villages the villagers realize they have no chance and they simply surrender. Some categorize such events as peaceful conversion And before the Arabs North Africa was under the control of the Byzantines, Romans who the Arabs went to war with And guess what, the capital of the Islamic empire at the time was Damacus in Syria, not Arabia
"Arab" doesn't mean any muslim in these DNA Tribes reports. It is defined by J1 and other hgs
This is why you can't loot at a chart about Early European Farmers and take info out of context and make a statement about Arabia
Posts: 42925 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: There is a method to the madness.
OH! the greatest frequency for hg-H is in the Taureg of Africa. And the greatest diversity is is a toss-up between Africa and Arabia. Your point?
I can back up ALL that I said..but you know that already. But we went over this already. Any new information?
You can't back up the statement that the greatest diversity of H toss-up between Africa and Arabia. Africa has the least diversity of haplogroup H, particularly the Tuareg Hap H is believed to have orignated in the Near East. The Near East is comprised of about 10 or more countries including Arabia. Show me an article where they say it originated specifically in Arabia, you can't
But why are you changing the subject I asked you about the ancestor of H which is HV
Again, tell us where the greatest frequency and diversity of HV is
And then tell us why you brought up HV in the first place
Posts: 42925 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
DNATribes have progressed, you should to. Stop digging up outdated and out of context charts to make your point. Lol! I am not getting caught by your tricks.
Tauregs has the highest frequency of hg-H even higher than an single European ethnic group IIRC. In addition they carry one if the highest frequency of the para group hg-V.
Significance?
-------------------- 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 |
Lioness at ES challenge me on this question, My initially reaction was, no, it did not occur but I decided to dig deeper on what really is the “Bantu Expansion”.
Typical of my MO I look at the topic strictly from a genetic point of view, first. Which is, is there a clear genetic gradient from the supposedly Bantu homeland along through the Bantu dispersal route? Or is there a separation of Eastern Bantu’s and Western Bantu’s and to my surprise not only is the Eastern Bantu older than the Western Bantu’s but the Bantu expansion may have originated along the Nile and NOT in West Africa as is the popular belief. I am open to any criticism to my observation.
So far the Linguistics and the genetics seem to isolate the Bantu origin IN Eastern Africa. Maybe someone will hit me up on the archeological and anthropological evidence of the Bantu expansion starting in Western Africa then spreading South and East.
So far I am getting conflicting answers. They are discussed below. I will start off with DNATribes statement made recently that ancestral Bantu population existed in Yemen PRIOR to the Neolithic(ie EEF). Then we have Kivilsid (Gates of Tears paper), Mozambique and Yeminese have closer haplotype matches than Yemen and Ethiopians. When hg-M and hg-N is thrown in the mix the data is skewed giving the appearance that Yemen and Horners have closer genetic affinity.
Looking at this paper it hit me like a lightening bolt – that Mozambique Bantus are older than the occupation of Africans IN West Africa.
So is the Bantu migration a movement of people of technology? Bantus in South Eastern Africa are older than Bantus in West Africa.
Quote: These results suggest that the Bantu expansion of languages, which started 5000 years ago at the present day border region of Nigeria and Cameroon, and was probably related to the spread of agriculture and the emergence of iron technology,17–19 WAS NOT A DEMOGRAPHIC HOMOGENEOUS MIGRATION WITH POPULATION REPLACEMENT IN THE SOUTHERNMOST PART OF THE CONTINENT, but acquired more divergence, likely because of the integration of pre-Bantu people.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
xyyman - You are wrong. You stil dont know how ADMIXTURE works. Once you start studying the intra-african migrations of humans you will know how wrong you are............Or perhaps you believe African Americans are ancestral to Biaka Pygmies? Or African Americans have that much ancestry from Biaka Pygmies? (Yellow K=6/7)
Or that African Americans are a mixture of Maasai and Mandinka. (K=2-7)
Remember you are the one that stated you dont even pay attention to the intermixing of distinct African people.
Oh yeah. Man up and name the region/country.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
It is really becoming apparent that you are a pretender.
You make ish up about contacting reseearchers and getting inside information then posting made-up HG for the AEians.
Then you have the cahuunas to confront me. There is a reason why I am ignoring you. You are not worth my time...really. May be Swenet is the brain behind the FB group. At least HE may understand what the Chart shows.
siiighhh! All the charts shows is shared SNP's..... that is it. It has nothing/nada to do with "ancestry". Ancestry is "inferred" ie guessed from the data.
There other tools that is used to determine "direction" eg Treemix.
What the chart is showing is Western Bantus and Eastern Bantus do NOT share AIM/SNP which would be expected from a demographic(people) movement from West to East. Also, this is what the author concluded.
As for AFRAMs. The SNP chart shows AFRAMS share ancestry with several African groups.
**How** it happened is where the inference comes in. Jackass!! My guess it is indirectly through European admixture. Maasai are known to share SNPs with Europeans. Europeans were NOT included.
As I said before I try to ignore frauds...my bad....'debating" with "beginners".
I am explaining this not for you but for lurkers. I am thinking now you are a fraud or just hell bent on trying to prove a childish point.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
You are really showing your stupid and ignorant side. Look at the chart. There is a reason why the author wrote "admix" above AFRAMS. Jackass! and not above Luhya.
Why?....tic! toc!
Shyte! I will tell you or at least lurkers. At K5-K7. The Luyha carry their own distinctive markers meaning they are ancestral and NOT admixed with any one.
You are really a fraud aren't you? Man, talk to the hand. Get out my face.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Admixture is the name of the program. You don't understand what a K is. It doesn't matter that the author noted admixed in the afram label. At a certain K Aframs will too create their own cluster. Since this will happen your idea of why specific groups become distinct because of an ancestral state has been debunked.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah! Yeah! Tantrum Tantrum! Good God? ...forget it.! You are dumber than I thought.
Swenet, you there? Can you help him out?
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
xyyman why are you trying ot derail the thread topic? The topic is Early European Farmers not the bantu Expansion
The reason you are posting in this in my thread is you fear if you make your own thread called "Did the Bantu expansion really occur?" as you did in ESR you fear it will get no replies as an xyyman thread as id did on ESR
The problem is people here and at ESR know your M.O. (the crazy Uncle) You should try a new screen name and post it at antroscape or Forum Biodiversity Diversity or African Anthropology Forum you might get more replies, just take the plunge you are talking to a wall most of the time
But first at least an xyyman thread here on ES first maybe someone will bite Also if you mention my name you should have the quote up from me including link to the article I linked about the Bantu Expansion
Maybe if you mention my name and what I said it will help you to get replies
and you need to wait more to see what people say but what you typically do is post 5 posts in a row You don't care waht anybody else says, you're the professor and nobody else knows anything "I got this" You need to unerstand the art of persuasion My C.I.A handlers tell me that's important
Posts: 42925 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Tell that to the scientific community who aren't as slow as you are, and who have observed the readily observable fact that the core of the Southern and Northern European populations are of a significantly different tint:
Again, please don't make me laugh. Native South Europeans and North Europeans only differ like one shade at best, and it's not even that visible. It's nowhere near the difference between most Nubians and Dinkas, which happened due to race mixing.
quote:Originally posted by Manu:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: If the Egyptians had lighter skin than the Nubians why did they have lighter skin?
Because Ancient Egyptians had Mediterranean and Middle Eastern blood.
quote:Originally posted by Manu:
quote:Originally posted by astenb: Like i said YOU ARE NOT THAT BRIGHT. You are not supposed to be looking at a MODERN population in SOUTH AFRICA as the SOURCE POPULATION of 2 NILE VALLEY families 3300 years ago. South African Bantu probably did not even exist at this time. You are now missing the forest AND the trees by concentrating on Leaves. You are fvking clueless.
3300 years isn't a long time from an evolutionary/genetics perspective. The Niger-Congo and Nilotic genetic components in Tishkoff et al. brake up BEFORE East Asians and South Asians/Australians split!
quote: Originally posted by Manu: I had to laugh hard...
You better start wiping the smirk off your face then because Ethiopians do have E1b1a-M2. While the general idea in your post is correct, generalizing and presenting misinformation doesn't make you any better than Xyyman.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: You better start wiping the smirk off your face then because Ethiopians do have E1b1a-M2. While the general idea in your post is correct, generalizing and presenting misinformation doesn't make you any better than Xyyman.
Ethiopians have zero E1b1a-M2.
They have older clades like E1b1a2-M329, that are related but not derived from Bantus.
E1b1a-M2 is a bona fide Niger-Congo / Bantu haplogroup. It is found at 0% in native East Africans who have no Bantu admixture (like the Amhara for example).
Posts: 424 | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
Obviously the Niger-Congo admixture in Arabians is recent as even Cushitics as far south as Garissa, Kenya have no Bantu blood.
Posts: 424 | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: You better start wiping the smirk off your face then because Ethiopians do have E1b1a-M2. While the general idea in your post is correct, generalizing and presenting misinformation doesn't make you any better than Xyyman.
Ethiopians have zero E1b1a-M2.
They have older clades like E1b1a2-M329, that are related but not derived from Bantus.
E1b1a-M2 is a bona fide Niger-Congo / Bantu haplogroup. It is found at 0% in native East Africans who have no Bantu admixture (like the Amhara for example).
quote:Originally posted by Manu: Obviously the Niger-Congo admixture in Arabians is recent as even Cushitics as far south as Garissa, Kenya have no Bantu blood.
^This is false as well. There is Niger-Congo-like ancestry in the Mediterranean Basin, including in Arabia, that has nothing to do with the recent genetic exchanges.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic