...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
Mummy Genetics Study May Be Prelude To Widespread Genome Mapping Of Ancient Egyptians
» 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: In fact, 13915*G having an independent origin is what makes it a useful polymorphic allele in the first place, that can be used to determined who Ethiopians inherited it from, and the upper bound of such an admixture date.[/QUOTE]Whom did Ethiopians supposedly "inherit" from? When, where, and against what backdrop? [QUOTE]Additionally, its also not clear from the article whether 13915*G was one of the newly detected mutations. But, as we all know, trolls are not particularly concerned with making sense of their dumb ass posts. Initially, when you first posted the irrelevant Tiskoff bit, I didn't want to say it, but, since you're denying the patently obvious conclusion that your post has zero relevancy, I'm going to go ahead and clue you in to the fact that your source says that all four LP associated alleles are dated and that the dates match with the archaeological record.[/QUOTE]Let me clue in your dumbass. I did not vouch for accuracy of the source's dates. I'd say bringing to light, the tendency of lactose tolerant polymorphism to occur on convergent evolutionary backgrounds is quite relevant. It's understandable that the empty volume of your head obscures the all too obvious. [QUOTE]This is another smack in the face of your theory that ''genes under selection cannot be reliably dated''. [/QUOTE]Deja vu. How was it done? and again, tell me in your own words, how solid dating on DNA under selection is achieved. [QUOTE] --that the admixture event of 3kya cannot be falsified with the vague, mindless mumbo jumbo references you have in mind[/QUOTE]Run by me, what is "mindless mumbo jumbo", and how you've arrived at this context-free analysis. [QUOTE] since the said methods cannot distinguish between the split of Levantine ancestral Ethio-Semitic speakers from the Levantine Proto-Semitic community ~6kya, and the admixture event 3kya which led to Ethiopian populations inheriting the said varations.[/QUOTE]Your fuckhead buys into the precision of "said methods" in attaining a magic introduction of Ethiopian mtDNA 3ky ago, but somehow the said methods cannot discern between the "split" from a supposed Levantine source, and the "admixture" event. If said methods cannot differentiate between two demographic events, then they should not be able to date them either; naturally, such common sense eludes you, because you talk through your ass. [QUOTE]Therefore, the TMCRA dates older than 3kya, but younger than ~7kya, of most non mtDNA L, U6 and M1 Ethiopian haplogroups cannot falsify the 3kya admixture event established by Pagani et al.[/QUOTE]What haplogroups/haplotypes are you dating, and based on what molecular specifics? [QUOTE]Heck, even haplotype TMRCAs that are older than that don't necessarily refute Pagani et al's admixture date of 3kya.[/QUOTE]As a matter of fact, older ages for what you dismiss as "Eurasian" in mtDNA gene pool would refute that magic date of 3kya, as you associated that date with the origin of the said Ethiopian gene pool. Secondly, it nullifies the claim that said "Eurasian" component is signal of "introduction of Ethio-Smetic language", which Pagani et al. were obviously trying to capitalize on. Besides, did I not request you produce how the solid dating had been achieved by Pagani et al., in your own words, and why you say it is accurate? Of course I did. You have a habit of evading, by dancing around like a fag--to use your own words but more appropriately, in the hopes to bore readers to death, and then, rehash your quackery on a different page or topic. [QUOTE] Pagani et al used another method to arrive at their conclusions, which you still haven't refuted, and [b]CANNOT[/b] refute.[/QUOTE]I've been waiting on you for the details of this method for ages; one cannot refute that which has not been established. [QUOTE] Hence, you pathetically resort to the next best thing; troll baiting others into talking about [i]their interpretations of/take on[/i] Pagani et al, rather than taking it up with the paper itself. [/QUOTE]Pagani et al. are not here debating; you are, dummy. I have to take it up on the idiot who cited them, albeit without actually understanding the study. Not that it is relevant here, but I have in fact "taken it up" with Pagani et al. [QUOTE]--that irrelevant exact matches of Egyptian and Ethiopian mtDNAs do not even begin to address what was posted[/QUOTE]Naturally, Ethiopian supposed "Eurasian" component finding its closest associations with northern Africa as opposed to either the Levant or the Arabian peninsula is not relevant to you, which begs the question of why you are even discussing genetics (clearly over your head), but it is obviously relevant to geneticists, and to the topic of supposed introduction of Ethio-Semitic from southern Arabia. [QUOTE]since, like the rest of your shabby post, its not incompatible with what I posted.[/QUOTE]Now you are just using comments like this as a blanket for coping out. You aren't even touching the molecular notes I posted, quite simply, because you can't. One thing is undeniable, as your last post shows: you are very talented at senseless crying; if only, the talent extended to delivering relevant answers and substance. [/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