...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
Theophile Obenga's "Negro-Egyptian" linguistic phylum
» 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] Most of Swenet post this time is even devoid of genetic argumentation. All smokes and mirrors. [QUOTE]Originally posted by Swenet: When you're trying to piece together the phylogenetic structure of an ancient proto-population (Proto-Afrasan speakers), you're not supposed to count other admixture events that postdate their split, dummy. This sounds strange to you because you're such a google scholar. [/QUOTE]Can you dial down the insults please. They are not necessary and reduce the quality of your post. As for using google, I didn't used second hand website opinions but genetic studies (frequency distribution of Haplogroups) to base my opinion. [QUOTE] [QUOTE] Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: You can refer for example to the Tishkoff study on STR for example or the DNA tribes SNPs distance tree. Those trees are not like haplogroups which use only one SNP (very tributary to "recent" or past genetic drift) but on the contrary use multiple SNPs (or STRs):[/QUOTE]They/their data certainly don't suggest anything even remotely conducive to Obenga's propositions. [/QUOTE]Sure they do. [QUOTE] [QUOTE] Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: All speakers of Negro-Egyptian languages also have in common traditional religion practices. For example, Ancient Egyptian and African Traditional religions are very much similar. They are too many common cultural trait to name but we can note the presence of Headrest in all Negro-Egyptian descendant populations.[/QUOTE]None of this would have been specific to the proto Negro-Egyptian community. These are all either easily borrowed (don't need descent from a proto-community to explain their distribution) or they predate the time frame Obenga is talking about. Also, provide evidence that Semitic speakers and Berber speakers didn't have these traits. [/QUOTE]I don't have to prove that. Beside the central linguistic argumentation, I just need to show that Negro-Egyptian speakers did indeed shared many similar archeological and cultural traits like religions. To stick with what I already said, I didn't see many traditional African Headrests among the Semitic speakers (or even Berbers) while I we can see them in almost all Negro-Egyptians descendants. [QUOTE] [QUOTE] Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: It's also important to note that ancestral E-M35(E-M78) are present in Nilo-Saharan speaking people for example (even if that fact is only skimmed over by Cruciani with the 'Nilo-Saharan from Kenya' with their 16.7% frequency of the M-35 mutation (11.1+5.6) ( ref. Table 1 ). Also note in the same table the presence of the E-M35* paragroup in South African !kung, Khwe and Bantu populations. Since they have no E-M78 in their population they likely acquired the M35 mutation within a population which didn't have the M78 mutation yet. A population close to the E-P2* who just got introduced the M35 mutation. The Khwe got the highest frequency of E-M35* haplogroup in the world. Obviously none of the Kenyan Nilo-Saharans or the South Africans were from the former Afro-Asiatic family.[/QUOTE]All outdated information. None of this Cruciani stuff is current. Also, if you're going to reply to my posts, make sure you read the goal post. Those E-M35 y-chromosomes in non-Afrasan speaking groups are all the result of admixture events--not through common descent. [/QUOTE]That's the only time in this post Swenet even attempts to use some genetic argumentation. Here he wants us to believe that: Massalit, Fur having 72%, 59% of M35 is not proof of common descent but that Bedouins 10.7% of M35, Omanite 7.7%, United Emirate Arab 7.3% of M35 is proof of common descent. That's the level of ridiculousness Swenet is trying to dupe us. [QUOTE] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: genetic analysis show that they have a short genetic distance between one another (compared to Semitic and Chadic/Cushitic speakers).[/QUOTE]See above. You're not supposed to confound post-split admixture events with genetic material that defines a proto-group. [/QUOTE]Please what's unite the "Sub-Saharan African","Native American", "East Asian", "Middle Eastern" families are not recent SNP events but ancient SNP events obviously. Wolof in Senegal, Yoruba in Nigeria and Zulu in South Africa don't share recent ancestors but ancient ones. At the time many of their ancestors were in the Sudanese and neighboring region with many of them speaking the Negro-Egyptian language. Many of them having the E and E-P2 lineages. [/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