...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
what do you think of these Amarna pop affiliator results by Keita et al. ?
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Askia_The_Great: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Antalas: Israel_C were not purely natufian nor predominantly natufian and other factors could be at work here. Neanderthals were not in Africa so how did Upper Paleolithic north africans ended up with it if there were no eurasian back migrations back then ? The idea that this genetic component was "absorbed" is purely speculative and based on your assumptions. There is no supporting evidence, and given the low levels of demography at the time, even a small band of hunter-gatherers could have had a significant genetic impact. Reality back then was more complex than what you guys are proposing.[/QUOTE]No one is arguing "purity", certainly not me. And even if the Israel_C were not "predominantly" Natufian, they would still have significant Natufian ancestry. In fact other studies showed that Israelis from the Chalcolithic period had SIGNIFICANT ancestry that the Natufians had. As shown [URL=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/core/lw/2.0/html/tileshop_pmc/tileshop_pmc_inline.html?title=Click%20on%20image%20to%20zoom&p=PMC3&id=6102297_41467_2018_5649_Fig3_HTML.jpg]here.[/URL] No offense, but I am having a hard time following your argument Antalas(btw that chart is from [i]Ancient DNA from Chalcolithic Israel reveals the role of population mixture in cultural transformation[/i]), as the chart shows in that study Levantine populations during the Chalcolithic period clearly had Natufian like ancestry, meanwhile this same ancestry is not being detected in huge amounts in the Horner, Kenyan/Tanzanian pastoralist or ancient Moroccans profile in large amounts compared to the dark green(which I bet $100 on is indigenous North African) from that chart in the Swahili study. The blue in the Israel_C is Natufian ancestry and I bet $100 on it. If the Israel C were not predominantly Natufian, then can you explain why that ancestry skipped a people(Israel C) who lived in the area that ancestry is from to be found predominantly in Northeast Africans? As for Neanderthals? No one denied Neanderthals were in Africa, however I said Neanderthal ancestry in Northwest Africa was most likely due to ancestry from southern Europe. Northeast Africans as far as I can remember have very little to no Neanderthal ancestry. Unless, you can point me to a study that shows such and I will be interested. And as for that Eurasian component from 30,000 years ago being absorbed? This is NOT "speculation", when a study I posted literally proposed that. Heck, the majority of studies propose this. Unless you're telling me that U6 never became localized? Either way, all in all these profiles are showing dark green and not blue like Israel C which clearly raises eyebrows. Thus far I have not seen any credible evidence/theories that dismisses the dark green as indigenous North African. [/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