...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
IAM population, Natufians, Proto-Semitic, North African Component
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by beyoku: [QB] After taking a hiatus from Egyptsearch and having a presence in multiple forums over the years this is my diagnosis of what is going on in the anthroscene. I will list the main 3 issues tha come top mind and they are NOT unique among people of NOT of African descent. 1 - Its not what you are saying....its the fact that you (Black folks/White folks) have the audacity to say it. This revolves around labels of "Afrocentricty" "Eurocentricity" and pigeonholing certain types of thought and certain types of people into certain types of places. Summed up : They dont want to listen to or accept ideas/discussion from Black Scholars and amateurs. EXAMPLE: If you are Black and say E1b1b originates in Africa, especially sub Saharan Africa you will get attacked by Euroclowns...sometimes even seasoned posters that know better. Later on you will see non Black posters say the same thing...and its ok. Interestingly Afro-clowns, Euroclows and "regular" posters will all attack each other based on "Idea A" even if they all hold the same opinion regarding "Idea A". :) To be Black in this space they want you to be a "Good Negro" be Anti-African and or relegate your posting discussion to areas South of the Sahara and West of Chad. Alternatively, Afro-loons with argue genetic afropurity with White folks all day, I chime in saying populations X Africans are "mixed" and its all good. 2 - The are coming to the realization....and quite begrudgingly that the concept "All humans are African" is not so much as an Abstract but rather a recent genetic reality. This is a big one and probably the most important issue but I will follow up with a third Geographic issue.. This is why ancient remains outside of the African continent that precede a 65 KYA OOA are so important to their psyche. Why non Human archiacs and them having such ancestry is so important. Its so important for these remains to show some continuity with later populations and not be dead ends. WHY? Because if the data keeps coming as its coming, probably Every modern Autosomal component picked up in "Admixture" is just going to be a "Different Type of African". Neanderthal is really all they have if these early sapien sapiens dont pan out. This of course is how we theorize it when looking at images of Population Bottlenecks but the ancient DNA From Africa hasn't quite (Yet) shown this to be a recent genetic reality. It HAS shown it for data coming from Eurasia : Example The conservative dates for the Colonization of the Americas are about 15kya. Ancient DNA from about [URL=http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-25020958]10 THOUSAND years Prior [/URL] in North East Asia ALREADY carries that "Naive American" affinity. Next we have more samples in East Asia [URL=http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/10/was-ancient-person-china-offspring-modern-humans-and-neandertals]Going back some 40 THOUSAND YEARS[/URL]....and Again they ALREADY carry an Affinity with what would become a "Native American" component. SO what we have here is the genetic reality of a Bering straits crossing concept showing the variants we view as "Native American" have been sitting in Asia some 30 thousand years before the Americas were even populated. It will be damaging to peoples fragile psyche to see Ancient African DNA - PRIOR to the standard OOA already carrying "Eurasian" components. XYYMAN gets the props for this early conclusion although his evidence sucked. This leads to anther point, the "The Eurasian Shell Game". 3 - Now combing points one and two...what Is to be done of Black people Arguing certain genetic components not too frequent in Modern Africans may still have an origin on the continent simply due to the nature of Human Migration and what we are getting from Ancient DNA? Well what you could do is play a game with the term "Eurasian". It helps them sleep better at night. From the Asian perspective: Amerindian folks that think their DNA simply "Came from the sky" may be quite upset to learn its has been sitting in Asia for 30 KYA. They could argue in a semantic way that its still "Native American" but we all know its just a different variant of East Asian. Moving to Africa, lets take a recent buzz term and popular concept such as "Basal Eurasian". Back to issue #1, they have issues that you said it originates in Africa but they probably believe that anyway. But on the flip side they will argue its a "Eurasian" component anyways. How do they use one geographical term (Eurasian) to override WHERE on earth something actually originates (Africa)...who the fvck knows. :) Mental gymnastics. We already know computer algorithms give European and Asian autosomal divergence dates well before OOA....Mofos are bound to have a heart attack if this is realized in the literal "Flesh" via Ancient African DNA. It gets to the point where entire concepts are re-wired to fit the scenario and instead of using "Eurasian" as a geographic term they will argue its being used as a genetic one.....again meant to describe the GENETIC affinity of a human populations but again based on Geography....but if its geography why is it "Eurasian" again? Who the fvck knows? LOL Along with the Eurasian shell game is the attachment of Autosomal Components to Uni-parental markers but with an idea that such Eurasian autosomes are Never recombined. For Instance : [b]ANY SUBCLADE[/b] of mitochondrial U, M or N or any M89 lineage [b]ALWAYS [/b] indicates gene-flow of Eurasians when present in Africa. Of course there is a big double standard with A, B, E, L loosing its African affinity based on migration into or out of the Sahara, out of Africa, after certain time depth, based on phenotype or perhaps never having An African autosomal affinity at all. There are even interesting scenarios that Such autosomal African affinity are present in Population A ....then lost...only to appear again. Or perhaps they are present when received by populations that look a certain way or live in a certain location but not other folks that look different and live in different locations even if both populations received such genetic input simultaneously. That is it for now. This is why Natufian cannot be partly African regardless of proximity to Africa and E1b1b. This is why ancient remains from North Africa IAM etc have no African ancestry despite U6,M1,E1b1b autosomal sharing with Yoruba. [/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