posted 10 August 2005 02:51 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Calypso:
Rasol thank you for your reply to my post. Although I find the arguments on both sides intriguing, I think a preponderance of evidence from your postings and others point to East Africa being continuously inhabited by black people and it would logically follow that E3b originated among a black skinned people who subsequently carried this marker further north. The posters, who posit the existence of non-black East Africans, bearing little in common (physically/phenotypically) with modern day East Africans, have not at this point adduced any compelling evidence in support of such a radical contention.

---

You're most welcome.

There is only one person offering the 'radical contention' in question, and he is not taken seriously for reasons you've no doubt deduced yourself.

He used to run a racialist message forum obsessed with proving the racial 'purity' of Southern Europe, and is notorious for obsessive and often quite offensive behavior and language in the service of 'lost cause' argumentation.

This forum has no moderation which attracts uncivilised behaviors.

posted 10 August 2005 08:01 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Babbling Ape:
Ethiopian, Nilo Saharan, Bantu, and San to [/b]all cluster together.[/b]

---

Too bad that isn't Cavalli-Sforza's conclusion about Ethiopians:

"On the basis of autosomal polymorphic loci, it has been estimated that 60% of the Ethiopian gene pool has an African origin, whereas ~40% is of Caucasoid derivation (Guglielmino et al. 1987; Cavalli-Sforza et al. 1994, p. 174)."

quote:

---

By definition, this can only show relationships within African groups, not between Africans and Europeans.

---

The distances between North Africans and Sub-Saharan Africans are equal to those between Englishmen and Sub-Saharan Africans. East African and Saharan groups are (expectedly) located in an intermediate position.

quote:

---

The same failing is shown on the cranial map shown over and again in which present Africans and Melanesians group together

---

Irrelevant (both are adapted to modern tropical climates). The point of the map is that Somalis are racially intermediate between Negroids and Caucasoids, which accords perfectly with their genetically intermediate status between Africans and non-Africans (Tishkoff et al. 2000).

quote:

---

And lastly the Lemba Jew fiasco

---

The only fiasco is your inability (unwillingness) to understand the difference between priestly Lemba (~50% CMH) and regular Lemba (~9% CMH).

quote:

---

When made to face the reality of the obviously Black African Lemba, the claim of caucaZoid Lemba is reversed.

---

Which brings us back to your contradiction, and the question that you can't answer . . .

quote:

---

Question:

Are Greeks "racially mixed" because of their E3b Y-chromosomes as you've claimed many times, or are Y-chromosomes unconnected to race and morphology as you claimed with the Lemba?

Or, we can try it this way:

Do you accept Underhill's statement that "There are no known genes on the Y that dictate bone morphology", or do you continue to maintain that so-called "negroid traits" in Levantines and Greeks are the result of their E3b Y-chromosomes?

---

posted 10 August 2005 08:58 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Calypso: There is more from Spencer Wells...

Quoted from pgs 74-75 of Spencer Well’s The Journey of Man:
“One other piece of evidence suggests a direct link between Africa and Australia – physical appearance. The dark skin of the Australians is reminiscent of that found in Africa.

There are, however, isolated populations of so-called Negritos living throughout Southeast Asia who closely resemble Africans. The most obvious examples are found in the Andaman Islands. The largest tribal groups known as the Onge and Jawara have many features that link them with the Bushmen and Pygmies of Africa, including short stature, dark skin, tightly curled hair and epicanthic folds”

---

posted 10 August 2005 10:52 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
Irrelevant (both are adapted to modern tropical climates). The point of the map is that Somalis are racially intermediate between Negroids and Caucasoids, which accords perfectly with their genetically intermediate status between Africans and non-Africans (Tishkoff et al. 2000).

---

Also is the fact that East Africans like Somalis have skeletal structures many anthropologists in the past have described as "super-negroid", as opposed to West Africans who have just "negroid" builds.

Anyway, it also has been explained by Tishkoff why East Africans are genetically 'intermediate', is because all Eurasians descend from a subset of East Africans, dumbass!!

Lastly, you seem to equate the term 'Eurasian' with Europeans or "Caucasoid" when peoples like the Andamanese are equally if not more Eurasian than Europeans (since Europe received recent African genes while Andamanese have not)!

quote:

---

Make up your mind, ape. Is E3b "Black" or uncorrelated with phenotype? You can't have it both ways.

---

USE your mind, dog. Nobody in here said the E3b haplotype itself had any effect on phenotype, since it is found in the sex chromoseome, BUT it just so happens that its original carriers were/ are phenotypically black.

Of course your dumb-ass cannot comprehend what this means, even though Rasol gave you a perfect analogy.

English is a language that originated in Europe, does this mean that all or most of its speakers are Europeans??

try and dissect that thought and maybe, just maybe you could understand. (I doubt you would though )

posted 10 August 2005 01:17 PM            

“Curiously, however, haplogroups E and J are again most frequent along the Mediterranean coastline and rapidly dwindle as one moves into central Europe, where the archaeological record tells us the main farming expansion took place”-Richards et al.

“Although the Horn of Africa is considered a geographic part of sub-Saharan Africa, we have analysed the Somali population separately in order to compare the results with previously published data from other African populations” - Sanchez et al.

The perfect example of genetically outlier Europeans:

Greek
E3b 22.4%, I 7.9%, J 21%, R1b 27%, R1a 11%

So at the end of the day, here is what counts; all else is immaterial to this reality:

The gist: To deny recent Black African gene flow, would be to essentially deny the existence of E lineages altogether in Europe, not to mention Benin Sickle cells, notably present in European countries like Italy and Greece. But as we can see, they do exist, particularly in borderline Europeans.

posted 10 August 2005 01:45 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super car:
Gentleman, at the end of the day, the religious practice of pseudo science by ginney pussy amounts to immaterial wop scraps, for he would have to deny existence of recent sub-Saharan Black African inheritance like the Hg E lineages and HBS (Benin Sickle cell) in borderline southern Europeans. The question is, would he? Well, given cave pussy’s unawareness of difference between male and female sex chromosomes, it is more than possible, that he is that much out there:

“Curiously, however, [b]haplogroups E and J are again most frequent along the Mediterranean coastline and rapidly dwindle as one moves into central Europe, where the archaeological record tells us the main farming expansion took place”-Richards et al.

“Although the Horn of Africa is considered a geographic part of sub-Saharan Africa, we have analysed the Somali population separately in order to compare the results with previously published data from other African populations” - Sanchez et al.

The perfect example of genetically outlier Europeans:

Greek
E3b 22.4%, I 7.9%, J 21%, R1b 27%, R1a 11%

So at the end of the day, here is what counts; all else is immaterial to this reality:

The gist: To deny recent Black African gene flow, would be to essentially deny the existence of E lineages altogether in Europe, not to mention Benin Sickle cells, notably present in European countries like Italy and Greece. But as we can see, they do exist, particularly in borderline Europeans.

[/B]

---

What maternal lineages do the Greeks have? E3b only gives them 10% African heritage. Not sure why anyone would argue against that being the case.

posted 10 August 2005 07:48 PM            

quote:

---

Lastly, you seem to equate the term 'Eurasian' with Europeans or "Caucasoid" when peoples like the Andamanese are equally if not more Eurasian than Europeans

---

Bravo and correct.

Same goes for East Asians, whose ancestors migrated out of Africa at the same time and as a part of the same group as Europeans.

East Asians and Europeans should show equal~ genetic distance from Africans.

They were essentially the same people, leaving Africa at the same time, after all.

But they don't.

Europeans are a full 33% closer genetically to Black Africans than East Asians are.

As shown:

And stated: "Europeans appear as a 2/3 Asian 1/3 African mix". - C Sforza

And explained:

Europeans arose from primitive hunters who arrived in Europe about 40,000 years ago.

About 24,000 years ago, the last ice age began, with mountain-sized glaciers moving across most of Europe.

Paleolithic Europeans retreated before the ice, finding refuge for hundreds of generations in three areas: what is now Spain, the Balkans and the Ukraine.

About 8,000 years ago, a more advanced people, the Neolithic, migrated to Europe from the Middle East, bringing a new Y chromosome and a new way of life: agriculture.

About 20 percent of Europeans now have the Y chromosome pattern from this migration. - PA Underhill.

This new pattern is further explained by Historian Professor Christopher Ehret:
We have genetic evidence of population intrusion from NorthEast Africa to SouthWest Asia.....There are several areas of the world were agriculture was independently developed - none in Europe, by the way.

posted 10 August 2005 09:01 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by osirion:
What maternal lineages do the Greeks have? E3b only gives them 10% African heritage. Not sure why anyone would argue against that being the case.

---

I don't know about your calculations, for it is impossible to determine to exact amount of gene flow (highest frequencies of sub-Saharan lineages are found in southern Europe, particularly in the southeastern regions.) , but the highlighted bit of your quote, is precisely the point being made. You can't argue against sub-Saharan gene flow into southern Europe, and admixture in Greeks, UNLESS you are in denial of the *existence* of recent Black African lineages, i.e., E3b lineages and HBS.

posted 11 August 2005 03:15 PM            

Greek
E3b 22.4%, I 7.9%, J 21%, R1b 27%, R1a 11%

So what? What difference does that make?

posted 11 August 2005 03:39 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by osirion:

Well based on these numbers Greeks have 10% East African derived lineage:

Greek
E3b 22.4%, I 7.9%, J 21%, R1b 27%, R1a 11%

So what? What difference does that make?

---

Osirion, do I really need to tell you that these are not based on sampling entire populations? I mean, that should be common sense. This is why I stated that precise level of these lineages in Europe or anywhere else for that matter, is impossible to determine at this point. However, since different studies consistently show higher frequencies of sub-Saharan E3b in southern European populations than central and northern European populations, it would be silly not to become aware of the fact.

Also what can we infer from the study I posted earlier, with Y chromosome frequencies?

Well, the paternal lineages of Greeks, as posted above, shows just how much outlier the Greeks are, in the context of European gene pool. The frequencies of J, R and E aren't that much far apart from one another!