...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
Ancient west Eurasian ancestry in southern and eastern Africa 2013
» 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: [QUOTE]Originally posted by The Explorer: Cite the text (Pagani et al. 2012) that mentions "SLC45A2", fuckhead monkey.[/QUOTE]You now realize that you phucked up when your glaring obliviousness to the matters being discussed led you to confuse my mention of SLC45A2 for a mistaken identity with SLC24A5 on my part. In a desperate bid to safe face and hide your glaring blunder, you're now moving the goal post to whether SLC45A2 was singled out and specifically articulated in Pagani's text. Filthy lying ass pig, didn't I tell your filthy ass to stop lying so much?[/QUOTE]Ok, Pagani et al.'s text does not mention SLC45A2 at all. That renders you a lying sucker of a stupid monkey. [QUOTE] [QUOTE]Originally posted by The Explorer: You've confused Pagani et al.'s application of "looked at" in the text for this self-interjected moronic substitution[/QUOTE]Lying ass pig, they referenced a 2009 paper which has a section dedicated to the exact same pigmentation genes that were of interest to Pagani et al. Do your struggling neurones imagine the footnote is sitting there for decoration purposes? [b]What is it doing there if not serving as a reference to point their readership to the genes they themselves had the samples tested for?[/b] Speak up, troll![/QUOTE]Of course, the footnote number is there for the benefit of the reader, so that the reader can track down what "other genes" they are referring to. But that is not what you said that raised eyebrows, fuckhead queen. Even if Pagani et al. themselves referred to said material to get an idea of what these genes were, they would have still had to familiarize themselves with the actual locations of those genes [b]before[/b] they actually sequenced the sites of interest. That's just common sense. They would not therefore be "looking for" the sites; they'd just go right to the sites of interest and examine them accordingly. As such, when the authors noted "[i]looked at[/i]" the other genes, they simply meant that they took them (other genes) into consideration, which you comically bungled up and mistook it for your own silly conception that their invocation of "[i]looked at[/i]" must signify their "[i][b]looking at[/b] literature first [b]to identify[/b] which genes [b]they should[/b] be [b]looking ‘’for’’[/b][/i]" (your words). LOL, you are such a dense bonehead. [QUOTE] [QUOTE]Originally posted by The Explorer: "caught red handed" in this piece, in which "derived SLC24A5 was selected for in a tropical environment" is nowhere to be found outside of your stunted head[/QUOTE]...and then the lying ass troll goes on to re-confirm its shaky interpretation that Pagani state that SLC24A5 got selected in the Ethiopian Cushitic-Semitic speakers because of its light skin associated features. [/QUOTE]These are of course your usual silly paraphrasing crap as opposed to my exact words, but in any event, saying that "SLC24A5 got selected in the Ethiopian Cushitic-Semitic speakers" is not the same thing as "[i]derived SLC24A5 was [b]selected for in a tropical environment[/b][/i]", now is it? Nor is saying that the [b]authors[/b] identified [b]skin pigmentation[/b] as the likely [b]phenotypic trait[/b] of this selection, my words, is not the same thing as "[i]derived SLC24A5 was [b]selected for in a tropical environment[/b][/i]". The selection does not have to be a response to the environment, which in this case, happens to be a tropically-situated one. Of course, you'd know this if you were actually clued in what was mentioned in the paper, and how genetics works, rather than manufacturing quotes just to score a point. [QUOTE] You're stumped by 1) the fact that the implied populations are living in highly inconducive intense UV environments [/QUOTE]As evidenced by what? Quotes, not dumb misinformed paraphrases. [QUOTE] 2) that there are no traces of other pigmentation genes in Semitic-Cushitic speakers (despite their inferred ancient presence) and 3) that derived SLC24A5 in the other Ethiopian populations did not undergo selection.[/QUOTE]Again evidences for these crazy accusations that only you seem to be clued in on. And again, just quotes, no misinformed paraphrase. I did, however, chime in on the first two issues of your "three point" wimpy accusations, and there is clear evidence thereof, that you are stumped crazy, like the stupid monkey you are, on what was actually related about those two issues. Any one with a slight nerve activity above you, which says a lot since you have none at all, can figure out that your nutty accusations and what was actually said are worlds apart. :cool: [/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