...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
Ancient Egyptian DNA from 1300BC to 426 AD
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Swenet: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes: [qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Swenet: [qb] @Ish Gebor I should have been more clear, but if you notice, I was addressing the source you posted. It wasn't directed at you, just at people who try to pretend like you can sample Upper Egyptian samples and get fest of South African and Great Lakes aDNA. Maybe you can find that in some immigrant sample, but as far as ethnic Egyptians, that is completely ruled out by the source you posted and all the other data. One can either say they're more African versions of the recently sampled Natufians and ENF groups, who are partly African themselves, or (playing devil's advocate) one can try to argue that they're tropically adapted, dark skinned Eurasian immigrants a la Raxter and Irish. The latter camp are delusional also, but not more delusional than the DNA Tribes camp. At least they can cite data with a faint semblance to what they're saying. Keita's work doesn't even support the DNA Tribes camp. So who credible represents them in academia? No one. They are going out on a limb and selectively posting pictures of ancient statues, not actual physical anthropologists or geneticists who agree with them. Whoever adheres to a literal interpretation of DNA Tribes, it's game over for them. They are just suspending disbelief at this point. @Sudaniya Noted. [/qb][/QUOTE]Tukuler demonstrated that the Tribes test was pulling on Dwarves and San. DnaConsultants confirmed that they had African derived genes. Where do you think people are delusional? Is it the Horn vs the rest of Africa? What did the STR test miss? [/qb][/QUOTE]No one is talking about the Horn, except as a useful proxy in a global context. But when you zoom in and look at the region, the Horn lags behind also when compared to ancient Nubians. The pharaonic STRs have a global distribution unlike SSA-specific STR alleles. DNA consultants' "rare genes" from SSA are confined to single regions. In this regard they differ from the pharaonic alleles. The global distribution of the pharaonic alleles obviously means that they were once abundant in North Africa. Instead, people exploit the fact that North Africa is admixed today. Note also that Mota was said to have Pygmy ancestry. Closer inspection reveals that it isn't even Pygmy ancestry. It's simply 'shared' with Pygmies. How do you know the same thing doesn't apply here? DNA Tribes never accounted for these effects. In the end, this doesn't really matter, because you'd still have to explain why the skeletal remains point in the other direction. We're supposed to reconcile all the data. A literal interpretation of DNA Tribes requires one to ignore >90% of all the available data. [/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