...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Deshret
»
peer review demolishes Winters M-173
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Clyde Winters: [qb] This paper as I said earlier does not falsify anything. He was able to dispute the research that shows the first Europeans were not pale,he could not dispute the fact that neither Loschbour nor La Braña carries the skin-lightening allele in SLC24A5…” (Lazaridis et al., 2014), nor was he able to show that the Neanderthal were pale-skinned. Moreover, he did not cite any articles that dispute Boule & Vallois, 1957 research that the Khoisan were the first Europeans. The rest of the article is his discussion of Africans not being the first anatomically modern humans (amh). This view is not accepted by any modern researchers.Also, I did not mention Indo-Europeans in my paper. Given the evidence his paper is nothing more than noise, saying nothing relevant. To falsify an article you have to present abundant counter evidence. Any serious reading of this paper will show that the claims in the paper are based on personal opinion not factual and reliable research. he ask the reader to take his word that what he wrote is accurate, in reality it is baseless, and mere ramblings of a man who is living in the past, afraid to admit that the white supremacist ideas he was taught in the past about ancient history are myths. [/qb][/QUOTE]Predictably, you have flooded the discussion group with irrelevant threads of spam (Dravidians, the plot of INdutvas, etc.) as a diversion from answering the real criticism in the peer review of your article 1) The reviewer is NOT Klysonov. You don't know anything about the reviewer so your ad hominems about him or her are wastes space. 2) In order to falsify something the first requirement is that [b]there BE something to falsify[/b]. It is YOUR job to put together evidence to justify your claim. What the reviewer is pointing out is that [b]you have not presented anything to falsify because your "data" consists of misquoting papers[/b]. 3) Apparently you know nothing about peer review. The job is [b]NOT[/b] to "disprove the paper being reviewed. It is to see if the paper presents sufficient evidence supporting the claims, whether the results are something new, whether it is appropriate for the journal in question, whether it is important enough to be published, whether the documentation, footnoting, and coverage of the literature is sufficient. What the reviewer is pointing out is that to quote the review [QUOTE]The cited paper (Winters, 2014) has avoided, unfortunately, an approval by the Editor-in-Chief, and slipped through to the Journal. [/QUOTE]i.e. that if this paper had had a peer review before publication, as is the usual case, it would not have been published at all. 4) Here there and everywhere you have claimed that R-M173 is "widespread in Africa" [b]but this is not true and you have not presented evidence that it is[/b]. You have cited papers about a narrow area of Africa that has R-V88 and pretended that these papers supported your claim of a wide distribution. From the review: [QUOTE]Here is a typical example of the author’s style and reliability of quotations. In his preceding paper, entitled “Possible African origin of Y-chromosome R1-M173” (Winters, 2011), the author writes: “The Khoisan also carry RM343 (R1b)… (Naidoo et al., 2010) the archaeological and linguistic data indicate the successful colonization of Asia by Sub-Saharan Africans from Nubia 5 -4 kya”. If the reader looks up at the Naidoo et al. paper, it shows that the great majority of R1b-M343 haplotypes were found among South African Whites (81 out of 157), while Khoe-san contain three R1b-M343 haplotypes out of 183. Mr. Winters did not even mention such a discrepancy, which brings a different angle at the data. Here is another example. In the same paper (Winters, 2011) he writes on “widespread distribution of R1*- M173 in Africa, that ranges between 7% - 95% and averages 39% (Coia et al., 2005) ”. He repeats the same “quotation” in yet another paper (Winters, 2010) ―“The frequency of Y-chromosome R1*-M173 in Africa range between 7% - 95% and averages 39.5% (Coia et al., 2005)”. However, in the referenced paper Coia et al. (2005) describe the frequency of R1*-M173 only in Cameroon, “with the highest frequency in North Cameroon (from 6.7% among the Tali to 95.2% among the Uldeme”. Mr. Winters did not mention that the figures were related not to “widespread distribution in Africa”, but specifically to North Cameroon, which is known since at least 2002(Cruciani et al., 2002, 2010) . In the same manner Mr. Winters “quote” data by Berniell-Lee et al. (2009), who had reported that 5.2% of R1b1* were identified in Cameroon and neighboring Gabon, and “quote” it as follows “Haplogroup R1b1* is found in Africa…Berniell-Lee et al. (2005) found in their study that 5.2% carried Rb1*” (spelling by Winters, 2011). As one sees again, Cameroon and Gabon were not mentioned, only “found in Africa 5.2%…”. Here is yet another example. According to Winters (2011) , “The bearers of R1b1* among the Pygmy populations ranged from 1% - 25% (Berniell-Lee et al., 2009) ”. In fact, Figure 1 in the Berniell-Lee et al. paper shows only two individuals having R1b1*, one from Baka tribe (out of 33 tested) in Gabon, and one from Bakola tribe (out of 22 tested) in Cameroon. So much for 1% - 25%. The list of misquotations can go on. That was a basis for the “African origin of R1-M173”.[/QUOTE]Why don't you deal with this rather than floods of spam? [/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