...
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 Fourty2Tribes: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by beyoku: How do you reconcile such low scores though? Your highest score with the Bahamas is 2 Million. The highest average of these mummies is 326. Your Indus valley score is 14.7, your Arabian score is 23. This is lower than the Average Horn of Africa and Sahelian score of ALL these mummies. Take a look at the low scores for the Elder lady KV35El. Her highest score is 20.87 - Your genome is more likely in Arabia than this mummy is anywhere in Africa. Your Highest European score of South Portugal is 24.72...compare that score to these mummies scores. [/QUOTE]MLI scores are based on the individuals vs the individuals. Her 20.87 is high because its weighed against other low scores. I don't know enough about the rate of mutations and whatever people mean by genetic drift to say why these scores are so low but I suspect it has more to do with their age North Africa's lack of continuity than the that the lack of STRs. Dwarves and Khoisan are not trekking North African anymore and the Levant is not what it use to be too. If they were, North Africa and the Levant would have a higher score. DNATribes reported in the Ramses iii results that D21S11=35 and CSFIPO=7 are infrequent outside of Africa. The Amarna have those two too. That is at least 5 genes that are exclusive or infrequent outside of SSA. Just one of those and chances are you are at least a halfrican mulatto. These are definitely discriminating markers. [/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