...
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 Elmaestro: [QB] Will we use genetics to validate Linguistics While at the same time using linguistics to explain genetics. Snake eats one end of the another snake eating the former. Phylogentic placement of Afrasian OOA makes sense, just as much sense as placing it in Africa. The arguments on both sides are fine, but what needs to be refined is the phylum itself. If you look at Berber and how it represents a distant branch in Afroasiatic simultaneously with how they genetically represent an early split from soon to be Neolithic populations, MtDNA U, etc. you'll see it makes perfect sense, and supports an early back-migration. But once again, we act as if languages can't converge, as genomes can, when two populations meet and culturally exchange concepts... lets take it east and look at Omotic and Cushitic and the "Nilo-Saharan/Eastafrican" roots both linguistically and genetically... Is there no pattern? if there is lets revisit the nile and the Geographical history as well as the Demographic history and see which groups could have possible converged there, what would that say about AfroAsiatic, as it relates to the genetic under tone. [IMG]https://s16.postimg.org/842a48cc5/African_Humid_Phase.png[/IMG] I will get heat for this on here but I'll come straight out and say it. I personally feel like we can't put Semetic in east africa or the Sahara, or Africa at all. Afroasiatic as a phylum however is a work in progress, period. [/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