...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
Genetic Closeness of the East/West African SNP population clusters (blog source)
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Gor: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by the lioness,: [qb] Neanderthals did not evolve into humans as Wolpoff's multiregional hypothesis states Europeans are, in fact, 97.5% African Homo sapien. We do have evidence of this, because we can can look at the spread of genes in Europe and compare it to the spread of African genes and it is obvious that due to their much smaller variation and certain matches that they come from a particular branch of Africans. The variation from this point of divergence has also be measured to about about 55,000 years, while African variations alone are least 140,000 years. (The fossil evidence points to about 50,000 years for the exodus from Africa.)he MRO concept is not even a theory. Because it makes no concrete predictions that can be falsified. We now have several mtDNA studies of Neanderthals, and this year the Planck Institute published a draft Neanderthal genome. So multi-regionalism (at least as far as Europe is concerned) is a dead duck [/qb][/QUOTE]Read the migration matrix example in the Relethford paper I posted: [QUOTE]What does this all mean? This simple example shows clearly that, given enough time, the accumulated ancestry of any population will be dominated by the largest population. This is intuitive: The larger the population, the greater the proportion of genes.[/QUOTE]What you are posting is compatible with Multiregional evolution (MRE). In fact it is what MRE predicts: [QUOTE]Based on these findings and the hypothesis of a larger long-term African population, I suggest that the multiregional model predicts that biological distances based on many traits will show that recent modern fossil samples are more similar to earlier samples from Africa than they are to samples from the same geographic region. I also suggest that regional continuity will be found in a small number of traits, but not all traits.[/QUOTE]So it is a prediction of MRE that recent or living (Holocene) "Europeans" derive most of their genes from Africa (a relic of Pleistocene/2 mya population size being greater there). So like I said: when discussing isolation-by-distance, population size has to be taken into account. If there is a far larger population exerting genes - spatial genetic 'similarity' via IBD is only going to refer to those traits as the result of genetic drift (and possibly a lesser extent selection) where there will still be geographical differentiation through a continuous gradient of mean frequencies in a small number of traits, distributed across space to the max regional edges of occupation. This is why MRE originally choose 10+ cranial traits at the peripheral/edge regions by studying the fossil record there (e.g. Europe and Indonesia). MRE deliberately chose the peripheral regions on purpose because this was where population sizes were the smallest throughout the Pleistocene (e.g. Wolpoff, 2011 estimates European occupants were no more than 8% of the global human population). MRE does not propose however these edge regions are discontinuous "clusters" or "races" of any sort. As far as the genetic and fossil (morphological)data goes, all the evidence is consistent with MRE, albeit a much "weaker" model than was originally proposed in the 80's, 90's or early 2000's. Even Stinger recently accepted this, but the "Out of Africa" theory consensus has changed itself too, to accommodate minor gene flow with non-Africans. I would say this debate has never been really resolved. [/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