...
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 Doug M: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Swenet: [qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Doug M: [qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Swenet: [qb] Doug said the term early European farmer is okay, just as long as you don't say EEF. But these terms mean the same thing. Imagine how salty and confused someone has to be to resort to these contortions and backflip gymnastics. [/qb][/QUOTE]Dude I don't want to go on another 20 page back and forth with you constantly pulling straw men. Obviously nobody is claiming that there were no farmers in Europe. The point is that the term EEF is specifically designed to illustrate the genetic ANCESTRY of those farmers [b]in a European context[/b]. Which means African populations in nearby locations are not considered as part of EEF. Now OBVIOUSLY there was African admixture among populations in the Levant going back many thousands of years and African DNA elements elsewhere in Eurasia. But the study of EEF is not focusing on that and therefore those [b]AFRICAN RELATIONSHIPS[/b] are not being considered and are left out on purpose. But of course, rather than you seeing that as a deliberate omission, you will sit here and pretend to have discovered something everyone already knew: that there was an African component within the early farmers of the levant and that African genetic component got carried into Europe with farming. But whatever. If it isn't obvious the folks behind the terms EEF and Basal Eurasian are implicitly filtering African dna ancestry out of those meta populations it is because you don't want to admit that these are flawed theoretical frameworks. [/qb][/QUOTE]So, because an African origin is not considered (which is a complete lie, BTW), I can't co-opt the concept and discuss it strictly in terms of the affinities of the ancestry in question? You're not even making sense as usual and you're lying when you say an African origin wasn't considered. Do you even hear yourself talk? You keep going on these confused rants but it always boils down to non-sequitur toddler logic. I can't use the concept because of biases on the part of those who introduced it? If everyone in science started throwing tantrums about widely used terms, everything would grind to a standstill. How old are you to keep repeating these dumb ass arguments as a barrier to conversation? Because that's all you're trying to do: impede conversation and understanding. You're too incompetent to even try to dispute more substantive matters as evidenced by your butthurt evasiveness around the purple component and the many patently false things you've said in your opinionated posts. You known damn well why you want to run away from the discussion. It's a dead end for you. You were caught red-handed trying to say Basal Eurasian "was never really in Africa". So explain the purple component then. You never did because you're all talk and no substance. You're full of bs and you know it. So of course you want to retreat to a more defensible position and claim your only issue is with the terminology. But no one believes you. You're just flip flopping and shape shifting as usual. [/qb][/QUOTE]Swenet, I am not really concerned about specific data points. Like I said, you as an amateur on the net trying to use these terms outside the original context of which they were created in the papers and studies that defined them doesn't qualify that usage as valid. For the 15th time, the issue I have is with the original authors and how they defined the terms in a Eurasian only fashion with no African mixture as part of the ancestry, especially going back to OOA and the various OOA populations in Eurasia. But then on top of that, you have decided that these terms with their glaringly obvious omissions of African mixture are better able to describe African genetic ancestry which is just blatantly backwards. Like I said, if Europeans can model their ancestry and [b]leave out African DNA[/b] then why can't Africans model their ancient ancestry and [b]leave out Eurasian[/b] DNA. Of course there was mixture between the two over time but somehow that doesn't stop Eurasians from leaving out the African side to model intra Europan population dynamics. So if we want to understand the intra African population dynamics then folks need to do the same thing in Africa. But some folks are hypocrites when it comes to that part...... I said this before and I am not going to keep repeating myself. I said this in the when to use black and not to thread regarding those populations of Africans who shared affinities with those who left and mixed with those who brought the neolithic revolution to Europe. Those populations who never left were still best described as African. This is the same issue and you just like going around in circles trying to defend illogical terminology just because you want to "win" something. That is why you keep throwing data points around which have nothing to do with the point unless they either support or don't support your use of terminology. That is why I am focusing on the semantics because this is an important issue. The scientific community has not evolved into some broadly objective community that is truly concerned about facts and logic. And this is where you fall on your face with EEF and Basal Eurasian. So sure, go ahead and pretend this is about data points and me avoiding something, while you avoid the blatant hypocrisy in calling EEF and Basal Eurasian which are defined in a strictly non African context. Because if they weren't they would have listed out African populations and geographic areas near Europe as reference populations for EEF and Basal Eurasian but they don't. No amount of spinning and your own home brewed data points is going to change that. [/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