...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
Genomic Ancestry of North Africans Supports Back-to-Africa Migrations Brenna M. Henn
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by The Explorer: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Swenet: Because there is no credible alternative scenario, which you will confirm in your next post by your glaring inability to present one.[/QUOTE]This is of course a shining expression of a lack of a nucleotide premise for your silly assumptions. [QUOTE]Of course you do. That's why you have a track record of dodging and running away from my posts, like the little pop-sh!t-and-run-off coward that you are.[/QUOTE]Apparently your supernatural abilities allow you to see some capacity in me that I possibly can't myself: Why then don't you tell me how my habit of applying science, the very opposite of what you do, can possibly be an "emotionally troubling" experience. [QUOTE]Filthy pig, the low amount of precise matches between Iberia and the Maghreb is state of affairs that poses no problem to my case, as I'm telling your dumbass for the 2nd time that these clades have been locally differentiating for millennia on both sides of the Mediterranean.[/QUOTE]Thinking through your numbass again: [i]half of the H lineages detected in North Africa are not shared with other regions and that this percentage is even greater in the putative source regions of the Near East (70%) and the Iberian Peninsula (76%). [/i] At 70%, differentiation; are you off your rocker? Do you realize how much of a population expansion that would require to generate that kind of a difference? And that's just the tip of the ice: you are apparently unable to confirm this from a nucleotide premise! Also explain why there is virtually no European male correspondence to your supposed "ancient migration" from Europe? [QUOTE] It does, however, pose a problem to your retarded view that these lineages are candidates for medieval female oriented slave trade.[/QUOTE]Why? Never advanced the idea that all H clades must have come from Europe, let alone relegated to European female slavery. You are a knuckleheaded ignoramus, and so naturally, you drew up that clumsy assumption on your own. [QUOTE]Because, piece of pork, this haplogroup is implicated, along with H and V, as having undergone local differentiation in the Maghreb, and because the idea of it coming from that area mirrors what has been said about the lineages implicated in the re-settlement of Europe from the Franco-Cantabrian region, for years. Of course, you wouldn't know this, being the charlatan that you are.[/QUOTE]You are merely repeating what you were just questioned on, fuckhead. Talk about being stuck on broken record. Get a dictionary and look up "how", monkey shyt. [QUOTE] No, lying piece of pork. What I DO remember, is that you selectively jump on and off the TMRCA bandwagon, like the sly, deceitful pig that you are. For instance, when Casas et al 2006 argued for Upper Palaeolithic migration from North Africa to Iberia, based on some inference that is much weaker than Ennafaa's TMRCAs, you graciously latched on to that bandwagon like a needy leech:[/QUOTE]It's not about rejecting a possibility for an estimation; it's about understanding its assumptive nature and applying it as such, silly chump. [QUOTE][i]As for Casas et al.’s report, it’s about making sure misinformation about their findings does not go unabated. [b]Their findings point to Upper Paleolithic origins of the European L1b, which is what you seem to be having a lot of trouble coming to terms with.[/b][/i] --Explorer [/QUOTE]The best you can do is to dig like a madman for a post that was taking you at task for misrepresenting Casas et al.? LOL [QUOTE]Filthy pig, are you saying that your earlier claim about the lack of extra-TMRCA ''assumption- based'' evidence for early dates of H, V in Northern Africa (e.g., local differentiation, appearance in Canary Island aDNA, etc) wasn't a lie? [/QUOTE]A lie? I'll be damned if I even know what your thinking-retardant skull is talking about. For instance, I know for a fact that I don't use stupid imaginary words like "extra-TMRCA". Won't be a stretch for everything else in that wimping above to be imaginary as well. [QUOTE]In your dreams, charlatan. All the sequences have been accounted for in modern Berbers.[/QUOTE]fuckface, those were Taforalt remains! Already you are unable to distinguish between EpiPaleolithic and the contemporary populations, even though your monkey ass was informed to the contrary multiple times. You are too nail-headed to realize that it is the nucleotide information in their report [b]itself[/b] that has been discredited, which you are calling "accounted for in modern Berbers". [QUOTE]There is mtDNA continuity from the sampled Taforalt specimen to today, and it pains you to no end. It pains you that these results mirror modern Berber mtDNAs and that this is mathematically impossible if these results are inauthentic, doesn't it, filthy pig? [/QUOTE]It's simple for me, numbnut: Cite all the nucleotides that Kefi et al. report, and describe the accuracies about them. Rambling on like a trifling bitch is easy, let's see if putting your money where your big mouth is as well. [/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