...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
Open Discussion about genetic, Egyptian, archaeological themes
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Tukuler: [QB] It's totally not science to rely on DNAtribes MLI scores and Tribe scores aren't independently replicable by anyone and are terms outside of science. In fact MLI was purposely designed to be confused with MLE --Maximum Likelihood Estimate-- a bona fide science term. DNAtribes [b]M[/b]atch [b]L[/b]ikelihood [b]I[/b]ndex isn't the [URL=https://mathworld.wolfram.com/MaximumLikelihood.html][b]M[/b]aximum [b]L[/b]ikelihood [b]E[/b]stimation[/URL] (link) used in peer reviwed [URL=https://www.genetics.org/content/163/3/1153.full]scientific articles[/URL] (link). Anyone truly interested in the science will follow those links or continue on with sloppy pseudo scholarship. The mummy profiles are available from the scientists who extracted the STRs. Articles out there with tables including 13 or more STRs for a wide variety of populations can be downloaded and compared with Pusch's data. That's something someone truly interested in and wanting scientific backing would run to not shy away from. That's how it's, for instance, known that Thuya's MiniFiler STR profile is [b]EXTANT[/b] in both living Sudanese and Upper Egyptians, as both Swenet (on Up Egy) and myself proved and anyone can easily confirm. But of course, doing that will burst irrational DNAtribes based bubbles. The geographic breeding population tables compiled by reputable scientists yield fact and destroy supposition. And so comparing them to Pusch's data for matches goes ignored, no shunned, lest personal biases go mask off for what they are, a holding of ego driven opinion as better than replicable science. [b]BTW[/b] vWA TH01 FESFPS and TPOX cannot be compared to Amarna/Ramses&son because none are captured by the MiniFiler kit. Only Belgrade's CSF1PO can be compared and one homozygous locus ain't telling nothing except Ramses and 'Son' CSF1PO valeus are 7/10 and Gusma˜o's (2006) 90 Karimojong samples from Uganda carry CSF1PO at 27.4%. Okolie's (2017) 102 Hausa samples have it at 21.08%. Her 128 Igbo's at 32.42% 134 Yoruba, 27.24% But so what. CFS1PO is ubiquitous at ~25% Eastern Hemisphere wide. Whoops I fudged up. E Asia was supposed to be solo its % is 22.9 [IMG]https://i.postimg.cc/6ptRmVRR/CSF1-PO-E-Hemi-ES.png[/IMG] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/230887250_popSTR--An_online_population_frequency_browser_for_established_and_new_forensic_STRs [/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