...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Deshret
»
The Plasticity of Prehistoric "Nubia" and Early Egypt.
» 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] [QUOTE]Originally posted by beyoku: [qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: [qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by beyoku: [qb] Also I never argued that E-m35 was not an original lineages of Nilo-Saharan speakers. [/qb][/QUOTE]A lot of fluff for nothing. My reply to Clyde Winters got nothing to do with the M35 among Cushitic/Chadic and Nilo-Saharan speakers. Even yourself agrees with me that E-M35 is part of the original lineages of Nilo-Saharan speakers. But yes it does seems that Chadic, Cushitic and Berber speaking people too carry a great proportion of E-M35. E-M35 predates the dialectisation/creation of those language groups. [/qb][/QUOTE]LOL, Becuase I didnt argue it wasn't an original lineages [b]does not mean I would argue it was.[/b] [/QUOTE]That's ridiculous. Why tell people on this forum that you "never argued that E-m35 was not an original lineages of Nilo-Saharan speakers", if that's what you think and what you're actually arguing? You're dishonest and ridiculous. As for newer V32, it could have developed among Nilo-Saharan speakers carrying M35 and be transmitted to other people at the same time of their Nilo-Saharan pottery and food producing technology or even before that. You admit yourself that Horn Africans were at the tail end of those innovations. They could have been on the tail end of the newer mutations like V32 too. Masalit got higher level of M78 and V32 than Somali and other East Africans after all (comparing Cruciani numbers about East Africans with Hassan numbers about Masalit). While interesting, I don't bank too much on paragroups as they are often simply haplogroups waiting to be defined (by genetic analysis). Each humans are born with about 100 mutations after all. Some of those mutations are bound to become dominant through genetic drift. Especially in ancient times with smaller population sizes. Although they do show that particular people carrying some specific paragroup are not direct descendant of the people with haplogroups already defined even if they share some ancestral haplogroup. For example, we know South Africans carrying former E-M35* didn't receive it from Nilo-Saharan people carrying the M78 mutations (although they did receive it from Nilo-Saharans carrying M35, even linguistic analysis proves it). Now that their haplogroup is defined as M293 it changes nothing about that. [/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