...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Deshret
»
DNAtribes analysis on Tel Amarna mummies
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: [QB] For one you must stop telling what *I* said when it is not true, but only your mis-interpretation of it. It's boring and unproductive to talk to someone who is like a wall. Read slowly what I say. I usually pick my words carefully. [QUOTE]Originally posted by Swenet: He doesn't know how internally conflicted he sounds when it comes to these results. On the one hand [b]he agrees that the genetic material on the 8 loci is very widespread in Africans traditionally called 'Sub Saharan'[/b] , yet, [/QUOTE]It's crazy to say I said that because just in the post above I say something else entirely. Not 10 posts above, but the post just above your reply. I said: [i]I don't know how widespread their genetic profiles was but it was distinctive of their common parents ancestors (compared to other people on earth) to whom they pass those STR repeats distinction eventually to their great (great) children descendants.[/i] So I said, I don't know how widespread it was since this is not relevant. What is relevant to a genetic study of that kind is how distinctive their genetic STR profiles are compared to other world population genetic groups. It's very important to understand those basic facts. For example, a mummy can have a STR Loci repeats value of 10 at the STR location D13S317. A STR repeats profile of 10 at location D13S317 can only been seen in, lets say, 4% of the Sub-Sahara groupings (tropical, southern, great lakes, sahelian). So it's not that widespread, only 4%. But if a STR loci value of 10 at location D13S317 exist only in 0% in other ethnic groups around the world then it's distinctive enough (in high percentage enough) to tell us that this STR loci value (of 10) from the mummy is Sub-Saharan African. Obviously for a person or mummy, you check both alleles and 7 more STR location in this case. And you continue to derive the probability of each STR loci from being more in that region or more in another one (due to shared ancestry). Generating a MLI value. [QUOTE] at the same time he wants to act as if the data necessarily indicates that the genetic material was spread to/from South(eastern) Africa to/from Egypt. [/QUOTE]Maybe you misinterpreting how I act like. [b]Genetic material are passed from parents to children. [/b] Distinctive STR loci genetic material are pass from parents to children. Two entities (person, mummies, people) sharing similar distinctive STR loci value, means they share common ancestors parents. So genetic material was effectively pass from one to the other, probably through common parent ancestors or by one group being the ancestor of the other. [QUOTE] So yes, in terms of the origin of the bulk of the Ancient Egyptians, the MLI scores South of the Sahara can be safely ignored. [/QB][/QUOTE]Stop saying that, it's just crazy. You can't ignore data because it doesn't fit your pre-conception. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3