...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Deshret
»
Cranio-facial studies - ancient Egyptians group with North Africans/ West Eurasians
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Swenet: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Swenet: [qb] [QUOTE]btw, here's are cranio-metric similarities.[/QUOTE]And not just any cranio-metric similarities; Brace lists what those dendograms are based on, and he used cranio-facial regions that don’t properly discriminate between Europeans and the used Northeast Africans ie, they highlight the similarities, and ignore the stark differences. Here the same thing will be told you as well; the features he purposefully nitpicked to create a false relationship between Northeast Africans and Europeans, are caused by convergent evolution, not genetic similarity. [QUOTE]I do have access to the studies uploaded in PDF format, i even pasted the links here. What unpuplished data are you speaking of?[/QUOTE]I’m talking about the unpublished MMD values. If you don’t have those –which I know for a fact since that data wasn’t published in Ricaut (2008) and Hanahara (2003) – you have no way of knowing how close Naqadans were to the used Sub-Saharan samples. [QUOTE]Well then they were not black, but rather reddish brown (on average). [/QUOTE]No human is literally black, so guess where that argument will take you. Westerners don’t use the term ‘’black’’ to exclusively refer to people who approximate the color black, so I have no idea why you’re making this false distinction. The majority of African Americans, who are called black, are on average brown. [QUOTE]But cranio-facial analysis is indicative of genetic relatedness. As are dental patterns.[/QUOTE]Not necessarily. If you can post all those plots, read all those studies, and still come out, not noticing the many unlikely matches, you must have a severe case of tunnel vision. Every screenshot you have posted shows unlikely relationships. Why do you think that is? [QUOTE]They were closer to Europeans than to many many sub saharan African populations. [/QUOTE]Cranio-facial relationships are discerned with the aid of certain variables, so what you’re really seeing, is relationships between what is measured, not some sort of ultimate and conclusive judgment. This should be taken into account when you making such sweeping statements. Analysis of various regions/parts of the skeleton, eg Limb proportions, bi-iliac width, metric analysis, non metric analysis etc. all show stronger ties with Africans than with Europeans, and that’s the bottom line. That Sub-Saharan Africans don’t all converge in that cluster, is all the more testament to African variability, which, in case you didn’t know, is a benefit to the African cause, not against it. [QUOTE]See the Dental, as well as cranio metric and non metric studies I have pasted in this thread. In 2008 non metric study (that sample) of even Somalis don't cluster close to them at all...much less Central/West and South Africans. [/QUOTE]This has to do with how long food has been processed by a given population, not with genetic relationships to those regions. Your reasoning is amusing. Somali people have close genetic ties with Modern Egyptians (let alone the ancient ones), and here you are, trying to convince me that the dental paper shows genetic ties of Naqadans to people from Afghanistan, over people from Somalia. Do you even know what you’re typing? [QUOTE]Ancient Egyptians had simple, mass-reduced teeth like Caucacians: North Africans, West Asians, and Europeans. [/QUOTE]That is because (the ancestors of) the Ancient Egyptians were among the earliest participants of the Neolithic revolution; the Saharan Neolithic. Mass reduced teeth have nothing to do with gene flow from Europeans, if anything, geneflow went mostly from Africa to Eurasia during that time period and before it (the Mesolithic). Like I said above, the only thing you’re doing, is frantically citing European scholars, who have no intent on using variables that discriminate between Europeans and Ancient Egyptians, in a manner that reflects their genetic relationship. This can easily be done by not obsessively focusing on the nasal region (which is what Brace is fond of doing). You can post and tout their findings as indicating genetic relationships all you want, but you’re not fooling anyone. [QUOTE]Cranio-facial analysis is indicative of genetic similarity and relatedness[/QUOTE]Then explain the many unlikely relationships in the studies you’ve cited, eg Somalia/China (Hanihara) Afghanistan/Naqada (Hanihara), Somalia/India (Brace), Australo-Melanesia/Africa (Brace), Naqada/Sagalasos (Ricaut). [/qb][/QUOTE]''Anthro-thinker'', I take it you can't ''think'' of refutations to the above? LOL. [/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