...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
Pleistocene North African genomes link Near Eastern and sub-Saharan African human pop
» 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 Elmaestro: [qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Doug M: Africa is the birthplace of humans, specifically areas South of the Sahara. Therefore the further you go back in time the more humans get close to SSA. This should be obvious but these headlines about "Sub Saharan" mixture are implying it would be impossible for African DNA to be in Early North Africans is stupid. They are still trying to find a way to separate the history of North Africa from Africa proper...... The title tells it all. I mean of course there is going to be a genetic relationship between Africans in Africa no matter what part of the continent and Africa and the Near East and Africa and Europe. Humans came from Africa. [/QUOTE]You already fucked up. This is why I cringe every time I see you post. ...It's not because I don't like you ...It's not because you're wrong af ...It's not because I even disagree with you You come with the same political bullshit over and over again, preaching to the choir while simultaneously exposing the fact that you're lost over and over again. But then you act like you have a one up or even an understanding of what you comment on meanwhile you don't. AND it shows BADLY. At the very fucking [b]least[/b] READ the conversation that other posters are having on the previous page!!! Holy shit. We already know you are lost, no need to grandstand either ...humble yourself and [b]ask some fucking questions.[/b] The authors suggest a link between Africans and near easterners, a Gradient. There's no evidence of mixture in these samples presented in the study. Your whole point crashed and fucking burned before you even got started. If we were to look at these samples reported by this study in [b]isolation[/b], disregarding everything we know from previous genetic studies and archaeology, these LSA north Africans would be intermediates of SSA and the Near east. NOT a "mixture." What you're attempting to argue is NOT [b]your[/b] biggest problem (it isn't even a problem at all). [/qb][/QUOTE][QUOTE]The Taforalt individuals derive one third of their ancestry from sub-Saharan Africans, best approximated by a [b]mixture[/b] of genetic components preserved in present-day West and East Africans. [/QUOTE]But anyway..... [QUOTE]Originally posted by Elite Diasporan: [qb] @Elmaestro He is the same type who believes when we say East Africans(East African Nilotics for example) are more close to Eurasian than other Africans then that means we are saying East Africans are "mixed." [/qb][/QUOTE]It says "mixture" in the extract. Care to explain? I mean you guys got me thinking SOMEBODY cant read. Just wanted to check and make sure I read english properly....... Because you know sometimes I do type too fast. The overall point was that this is what you would EXPECT if OOA is valid. North African populations 20000 years ago would be both temporally and geographically intermediate, with SSA approximating the origin of all humans. The PROBLEM has been that all these papers keep pushing ancient North Africans as "Eurasian". And I personally never agreed with that sentiment. But anyway...... Now if you didn't agree just say so. But don't tell me what to think. I don't tell you what to think (whether I agree or not) but don't tell me what to think either. [/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