...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
Because I need to get something off my chest
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Tyrannohotep: [QB] I wasn't addressing you in particular. But I would have thought you've picked up that a large chunk of the pan-Africanists in this community do in fact want Africans, or at least SSA, to be one big monophyletic clade. Isn't that the mindset you've been criticizing for years? [QUOTE]Originally posted by Swenet: [qb] I'm confused. You said "I'm not the only one with this view". Why say that right after saying something that isn't disputed anywhere? Lol. Wasn't this already apparent from [URL=http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=009677;p=1#000006]what you posted earlier?[/URL] Your Tishkoff tree in that post doesn't depict SSA ancestry as forming a clade relative to other humans either. [IMG]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/dc/Paraphyletic.svg/300px-Paraphyletic.svg.png[/IMG] ^This pattern of differentiation is no different from the Tishkoff tree. It's just more stylized and upside down. [QUOTE]Originally posted by Tyrannohotep: [qb] To be honest, my belief is that "sub-Saharan African" itself is a [URL=http://www.dictionary.com/browse/paraphyletic]paraphyletic[/URL] category. It seems to mean basically any modern [i]Homo sapiens[/i] who isn't OOA or pre-OOA. And I'm not the only one with this view: [URL=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4949479/#!po=66.4063]Human population history revealed by a supertree approach[/URL] [QUOTE]The resulting supertree topology includes the most basal position of S African Khoisan followed by C African Pygmies, and the [qb]paraphyletic section of all other sub-Saharan peoples[/qb].[/QUOTE]In that respect it's similar to the traditional understanding of "reptile" which excludes birds, even though we now know birds represent a branch of the theropod dinosaurs. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/dc/Paraphyletic.svg/300px-Paraphyletic.svg.png For example, if you compare the genetics of southern African Khoisan peoples with those of other sub-Saharans and then OOA, you might find that most sub-Saharan populations actually appear closer to OOA than they do to these Khoisan populations. See K = 2 on this chart, wherein most SSA groups have [i]predominantly[/i] "red" components like those of the French instead of "blue" like the Khoisan peoples. http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-QfOlhMaKVUc/UA_N_qZbFxI/AAAAAAAAFGE/sb6UiX29r_c/s1600/admixture.jpg A category like "sub-Saharan African" might have utility if you need to single out those Africans who aren't descended from the pre-OOA branch, much as we conventionally use "dinosaur" as shorthand for the non-avian ones. But they still aren't a monophyletic grouping, so anyone trying to force genetics into an exclusive "pan-African" scheme is going to make a fool out of themselves in any case. [/qb][/QUOTE][/qb][/QUOTE] [/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