posted 02 June 2005 12:45 AM            

"It is worth noting that the frequency of group VI chromosomes in the Ethiopian Jews (just one chromosome out of 22) is similar to that reported for the p12f2 chromosomes in the Oromo from Ethiopia (4%) and is considerably lower than the frequency reported for the Amhara of the same region (33%), for whom a strong Middle Eastern genetic component has been reported (Semino et al. 2002). These data, together with those reported elsewhere (Ritte et al. 1993a, 1993b; Hammer et al. 2000) suggest that the Ethiopian Jews acquired their religion without substantial genetic admixture from Middle Eastern peoples and that they can be considered an ethnic group with essentially a continental African genetic composition."

A back migration from Asia to sub-Saharan Africa is supported by high-resolution analysis of human Y-chromosome haplotypes.

"Group VI was observed almost exclusively as the 12f2 subgroup in the Ethiopians. Among them, the Amhara are by far the most important component (33.4%, vs. 3.8% for the Oromo [P < .0001] and 3.4% for the other Ethiopian data [P < .0001]). This difference, not revealed in the study by Passarino et al. (1998), in which the Oromo were underrepresented, might reflect distinct population histories. It is reported (Levine 1974) that the Amhara experienced a strong influence from Middle Eastern populations, in which the 12f2 8-kb allele has a very high frequency and probably originated (Santachiara-Benerecetti et al. 1993; Semino et al. 1996; Quintana-Murci et al. 2001). This is further supported by the opposite distribution of the M35 subclade (35.4% for the Amhara, vs. 62.8% for the Oromo [P < .005] and 31.8% for the other Ethiopian data). Group VI also includes two Senegalese who, however, are currently defined only by the M89 mutation (haplotype 27) and lack any other known mutation characterizing the M89 subgroups."

Ethiopians and Khoisan Share the Deepest Clades of the Human Y-Chromosome Phylogeny

Last the contrasting frequencies of haplogroups E and J in Amhara vs Oromo

Origin, Diffusion, and Differentiation of Y-Chromosome Haplogroups E and J: Inferences on the Neolithization of Europe and Later Migratory Events in the Mediterranean Area

These three studies have reinforced exactly what I've been saying in reference to the striking differences in Y chromosones between Ethiopian populations when they're *NOT* pooled together. All three concentrate specifically on the Y-Chromosone and have made note of the differences.

Note: Erronoes E please look at the authors who contributed in all three studies that noted the differences.

posted 02 June 2005 07:43 AM            

quote:

---

Furthermore, other studies using autosomal DNA (like Cavalli-Sforza did) describe both the Oromo and the Amhara as intermediate between Africans and Eurasians:

• "The genetic distance analysis showed the separation between African and non-African populations, with the Amhara and Oromo located in an intermediate position." (De Stefano et al. 2002)

• "...the Oromo and Amhara appear quite similar to Europoids (particularly to the South Arabians) and considerably different from the Negritic peoples." (Tartaglia et al. 1996)

And these X-chromosome, autosome and HLA studies confirm Oromo-Amhara genetic affinities:

• "Within Ethiopia the two largest ethnic groups, the Amhara and Oromo, were not found to be statistically distinct, based on an exact test of haplotype frequencies." (Lovell et al. 2005)

• "Here we report the gene frequencies of these two polymorphic sites in nine additional populations (Egyptians, Spaniards, Japanese, Chinese, Filipinos, Vietnamese, Africans from Togo and from Benin, and Pygmies), confirming their ethnospecificity and, through the analysis of these two markers in Oromo and Amhara of Ethiopia (two mixed populations), their usefulness in genetic admixture studies." (Ciminelli et al. 2002)

• "Oromo and Amhara only showed minor differences in spite of their different origins and histories." (Fort et al. 1998)

---

posted 02 June 2005 09:34 AM            

East Africa is largely a genetic subset of sub-sahara Africa.

The rest of the world is largely a genetic subset of East Africa.

By definition then - East Africa is intermediate in genetic distance between the rest of Africa and the rest of the world.

Which proves that the world's entire non-African population must be descended from a relatively small sub-set of East Africans.

There isn't much [non-African] diversity because there wasn't much genetic material to begin with. Africans are descended from a far larger population - Spencer Wells.

This pattern of variation suggests that all non-Africans derive from a single common ancestral population which migrated out of Northeast Africa, - Tishkoff

quote:

---

For this reason East Africans will virtually ALWAYS be genetically 'intermediate' between ->

* the rest of indigenous Africa,

** anyplace outside of Africa.

posted earlier:

West African:

Eurasian [Indonesia]:

* note: adaman islanders are just as 'eurasian' as japanese islanders and british islanders.

The East African Oromo - are "intermediate" between the above two peoples:

And of course, Europe and European whites, who are small and genetically trivial group of recent OOA peoples who supplanted Neanderthal in Europe....have no particular bearing, influence or relevance to any of this.

If the entire non-African population consisted only of East African, West African, Adaman, and say....Chinese....this would still be the case.

---

It's good that everyone else is grasping this.

Keep trying, Erroneous. You'll get it, in spite of yourself.

posted 03 June 2005 08:14 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
TopDog is correct as usual.

---

As usual, you're a retarded monkey with no answers . . .

quote:

---

"Considering the erythrocyte enzyme data, the Oromo and Amhara appear quite similar to Europoids (particularly to the South Arabians) and considerably different from the Negritic peoples. There is evidence for close genetic affinity among the Cushitic- and Semitic-speaking population groups of the Horn. Admixture between Europoid and Negritic populations seems to have been the main microevolutionary factor in generating the present day Cushitic (and Semitic)-speaking group of eastern Africa." (Tartaglia et al., Am J Hum Biol, 1996)

"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). Our Ethiopian sample also lacks the sY81-G allele, which was associated with 86% and 69% of Senegalese and mixed-African YAP+ chromosomes, respectively. This suggests that male-mediated gene flow from Niger-Congo speakers to the Ethiopian population was probably very limited ... Caucasoid gene flow into the Ethiopian gene pool occurred predominantly through males. Conversely, the Niger-Congo contribution to the Ethiopian population occurred mainly through females." (Passarino et al., Am J Hum Genet, 1998)

---

posted 03 June 2005 11:30 AM            

Sadly you're too stupid to understand them.

quote:

---

These data, together with those reported elsewhere (Ritte et al. 1993a, 1993b; Hammer et al. 2000) suggest that the Ethiopian Jews acquired their religion without substantial genetic admixture from Middle Eastern peoples and that they can be considered an ethnic group with essentially a continental African genetic composition

---

quote:

---

This difference, not revealed in the study by Passarino et al. (1998), in which the Oromo were underrepresented, might reflect distinct population histories.

---

posted 04 June 2005 07:51 AM            

quote:

---

The Amhara and Oromo are closely related:

• "Within Ethiopia the two largest ethnic groups, the Amhara and Oromo, were not found to be statistically distinct, based on an exact test of haplotype frequencies." (Lovell et al. 2005)

• "Oromo and Amhara only showed minor differences in spite of their different origins and histories." (Fort et al. 1998)

Both groups are admixed with Eurasians:

• "The genetic distance analysis showed the separation between African and non-African populations, with the Amhara and Oromo located in an intermediate position." (De Stefano et al. 2002)

• "Considering the erythrocyte enzyme data, the Oromo and Amhara appear quite similar to Europoids (particularly to the South Arabians) and considerably different from the Negritic peoples. There is evidence for close genetic affinity among the Cushitic- and Semitic-speaking population groups of the Horn. Admixture between Europoid and Negritic populations seems to have been the main microevolutionary factor in generating the present day Cushitic (and Semitic)-speaking group of eastern Africa." (Tartaglia et al. 1996)

• "Here we report the gene frequencies of these two polymorphic sites in nine additional populations (Egyptians, Spaniards, Japanese, Chinese, Filipinos, Vietnamese, Africans from Togo and from Benin, and Pygmies), confirming their ethnospecificity and, through the analysis of these two markers in Oromo and Amhara of Ethiopia (two mixed populations), their usefulness in genetic admixture studies." (Ciminelli et al. 2002)

Thus, Ethiopians are a hybrid population:

• "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). Our Ethiopian sample also lacks the sY81-G allele, which was associated with 86% and 69% of Senegalese and mixed-African YAP+ chromosomes, respectively. This suggests that male-mediated gene flow from Niger-Congo speakers to the Ethiopian population was probably very limited ... Caucasoid gene flow into the Ethiopian gene pool occurred predominantly through males. Conversely, the Niger-Congo contribution to the Ethiopian population occurred mainly through females." (Passarino et al. 1998)

---

posted 04 June 2005 09:18 AM            

quote:

---

Unrefuted genetic data

---

Should read: Studies that you don't understand because you can only parrot Dienekes, and which have been refuted by PEER REVIEW in any case:

* These data, together with those reported elsewhere (Ritte et al. 1993a, 1993b; Hammer et al. 2000) suggest that the Ethiopian Jews acquired their religion without substantial genetic admixture from Middle Eastern peoples and that they can be considered an ethnic group with essentially a continental African genetic composition."

" This difference, not revealed in the study by Passarino et al. (1998), in which the Oromo were underrepresented, might reflect distinct population histories. "

RIP Passarino. LOL@Dienekes fanboy Erroneous.

You were saying 'something'?

posted 04 June 2005 05:01 PM            

"Here we report the gene frequencies of these two polymorphic sites in nine additional populations (Egyptians, Spaniards, Japanese, Chinese, Filipinos, Vietnamese, Africans from Togo and from Benin, and Pygmies), confirming their ethnospecificity and, through the analysis of these two markers in Oromo and Amhara of Ethiopia (two mixed populations), their usefulness in genetic admixture studies." (Ciminelli et al. 2002)"

From the full text *THIS* was stated:

"The sub-Saharan African component seems to be larger in the Oromo than in the Amhara. This result was obtained using both RFLPs, mtDNA and Y-chromosome specific markers, and several classical protein markers (Tartaglia et al. 1996; Scozzari et al. 1999; Scacchi et al. 1994; Passarino et al. 1998; De Stefano et al. [in press])."

Thus those same studies that Erroneous E keeps repeatedly spamming and distorting in fact are *REFUTING* him.

posted 04 June 2005 05:35 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Topdog:

From the full text *THIS* was stated:

"The sub-Saharan African component seems to be larger in the Oromo than in the Amhara. This result was obtained using both RFLPs, mtDNA and Y-chromosome specific markers, and several classical protein markers (Tartaglia et al. 1996; Scozzari et al. 1999; Scacchi et al. 1994; Passarino et al. 1998; De Stefano et al. [in press])."

Thus those same studies that Erroneous E keeps repeatedly spamming and distorting in fact are *REFUTING* him.

---

Quite typical of Evil, the unsuccessful spin doctor aspirant.

posted 05 June 2005 07:23 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
which have been refuted by PEER REVIEW in any case:

---

If you weren't an illiterate black ape, you would see that the studies I posted A) have nothing whatsoever to do with Ethiopian Jews, and B) invalidate any criticism of Passarino because Oromo and Amhara are genetically similar and both hybrid.

posted 05 June 2005 07:28 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Topdog:
From the full text *THIS* was stated:

"The sub-Saharan African component seems to be larger in the Oromo than in the Amhara.

---

Which proves you wrong by confirming that both the Oromo and the Amhara have non-Sub-Saharan (i.e. Eurasian) DNA. The fact that the Amhara have a little more (how much?) is irrelevant.

quote:

---

Thus those same studies that Erroneous E keeps repeatedly spamming and distorting in fact are *REFUTING* him.

---

Uh, no. They're clearly refuting you because you have no answers for them:

• "Within Ethiopia the two largest ethnic groups, the Amhara and Oromo, were not found to be statistically distinct, based on an exact test of haplotype frequencies." (Lovell et al. 2005)

• "Oromo and Amhara only showed minor differences in spite of their different origins and histories." (Fort et al. 1998)

• "The genetic distance analysis showed the separation between African and non-African populations, with the Amhara and Oromo located in an intermediate position." (De Stefano et al. 2002)

• "Considering the erythrocyte enzyme data, the Oromo and Amhara appear quite similar to Europoids (particularly to the South Arabians) and considerably different from the Negritic peoples. There is evidence for close genetic affinity among the Cushitic- and Semitic-speaking population groups of the Horn. Admixture between Europoid and Negritic populations seems to have been the main microevolutionary factor in generating the present day Cushitic (and Semitic)-speaking group of eastern Africa." (Tartaglia et al. 1996)

posted 05 June 2005 07:37 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
If you weren't an illiterate black ape,

---

morons like you have to turn to racial discrimination when facts do not clearly suit yours.

posted 05 June 2005 07:42 AM            

quote:

---

You are only a danger to yourself, and perfectly harmless to anyone else.

---

posted 06 June 2005 06:35 AM            

"In contrast, the similarity of Amharas and Oromos, also expressed in other genetic loci (Fort et al. 1998; Corbo et al. 1999), supports the idea that “amharization” may
have been largely a sociocultural rather than a genetic phenomenon. Yet, it is important to add here that Ychromosomal
haplogroup J1-M267, which is widespread
throughout Arab-speaking countries and encompasses a third of Amharan Y chromosomes, has hardly penetrated the Cushitic-speaking Oromo population (Semino et al.2004)."

"Furthermore, as already mentioned above, there is a profound difference in J1-M267
frequencies between the Semitic-speaking Amharas, who probably arrived relatively recently from Arabia, and the Cushitic-speaking Oromos, among whom the frequency
of J1-M267 chromosomes does not exceed 3%(Cruciani et al. 2004)."

[url=http://evolutsioon.ut.ee/publications/Kivisild2004.pdf#search='Ethiopian%20mitochondrial%20DNA%20heritage:%20tracking%20gene%20flow%20across%20and%20around%20the%20gate%20of%2 0tears']link[/url]

Notice how the same author referenced the same studies I referenced in my previous post above and noted the same differences I noted, mainly on the Y-chromosone. Erroneous E has run out of options because I backed my post with data from another *GENETICIST* who noted the same differences I notices. If one even views the maternal lineages, Cushitic speakers[which include Oromos] are still different. Oromos were still under represented yet again when compared to Amharas. There were only 33 Oromos tested compared to 120 Amharas.

posted 07 June 2005 07:50 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Topdog:
After carefully reaseraching the published data on the Y-chromosone and mtDNA lineages of the Oromos, I calculated their Eurasian mixture at only ~15%. using the same published data to calculate the Amharas percentage of Eurasian mixture comes out ~30%.

---

You're only looking at haplogroup J. According to Semino 2004, the Oromo have 3.8% J and 78.2% E3b, while the Amhara have 35.4% J and 45.8% E3b. Put those together and you get admixture levels of 41% for the Oromo and 40.6% for the Amhara, which (when added to mtDNA) would explain these independent results:

• "Oromo and Amhara only showed minor differences in spite of their different origins and histories." (Fort et al. 1998)

• "The genetic distance analysis showed the separation between African and non-African populations, with the Amhara and Oromo located in an intermediate position." (De Stefano et al. 2002)

• "Considering the erythrocyte enzyme data, the Oromo and Amhara appear quite similar to Europoids (particularly to the South Arabians) and considerably different from the Negritic peoples. There is evidence for close genetic affinity among the Cushitic- and Semitic-speaking population groups of the Horn. Admixture between Europoid and Negritic populations seems to have been the main microevolutionary factor in generating the present day Cushitic (and Semitic)-speaking group of eastern Africa." (Tartaglia et al. 1996)

posted 07 June 2005 01:07 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
You're only looking at haplogroup J. According to Semino 2004, the Oromo have 3.8% J and 78.2% E3b, while the Amhara have 35.4% J and 45.8% E3b. Put those together and you get admixture levels of 41% for the Oromo and 40.6% for the Amhara, which (when added to mtDNA) would explain these independent results:

---

Dummy, the rest of those Y-chromosones belong to haplogroups A nd B, you still can't read *ALL* of the published data, now you're attempting to spin.

quote:

---

The two groups may be distinct in terms of their frequencies of "Middle Eastern" DNA (J) and "East African" DNA (E3b), but since all of that ancestry is Caucasoid, they're not distinct in terms of overall admixture, as the evidence clearly indicates.

---

Stupid Euro, quit smoking whatever drugs you're buying, the E3b in Oromos and Amharas is *NOT* Caucasoid, you can spin all you want and try to convince yourself but you haven't proven that E3b in these two African groups have anything to do with Caucasoids. Haplogroups E and J have different histories in Ethiopia with J being a signal of a back-migration and E3b being aboriginal East African, derived from sub-Saharan E3b*. There were no prehistoric East African Caucasoids, so lay off the marijuana.

posted 08 June 2005 06:43 AM            

quote:

---

"The genetic distance analysis showed the separation between African and non-African populations, with the Amhara and Oromo located in an intermediate position." (De Stefano et al. 2002)

---

Intermediate has already been explained you repetitive trolling idiot, it was point out by Tischkoff et tal. Keep spinning and imagining that intermediate has something to do with being mix or mixture.

quote:

---

"Considering the erythrocyte enzyme data, the Oromo and Amhara appear quite similar to Europoids (particularly to the South Arabians) and considerably different from the Negritic peoples. There is evidence for close genetic affinity among the Cushitic- and Semitic-speaking population groups of the Horn. Admixture between Europoid and Negritic populations seems to have been the main microevolutionary factor in generating the present day Cushitic (and Semitic)-speaking group of eastern Africa." (Tartaglia et al. 1996)

---

This has been shown to be refuted because Oromos and Amharas have vastly different mixture of Eurasian ancestry. Oromos have only 15% Eurasian mixture while Amharas have 30%. Eurasian or Caucasoid mixture in Oromos is relatively weakly manifested, while it is substantially[but not predominately] manifested in Amharas. All those studies you keep citing had the Oromos vastly underrespresented compared to Amharas and when pooled together as 'Ethiopians' without noticing the striking differences of course the genetic profile of the Amharas is going to be more represented you moron. Semino et tal made note of this same point. If you took 100 mulattoes and 20 non-mulatto blacks and pooled them together as 'African-Americans' who's genetic profile is going to inflate the results of such a study? Logic never seems to take hold in your puny pathetic brain of yours does it Erroneous E?

quote:

---

"Oromo and Amhara only showed minor differences in spite of their different origins and histories." (Fort et al. 1998)

---

Maternally they don't much of a difference in the amount of Eurasian they both have, but *PATERNALLY* they do, that study is old news.

posted 08 June 2005 07:57 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Topdog:
Dummy, the rest of those Y-chromosones belong to haplogroups A nd B

---

What's that got to do with anything, moron? We're talking about non-African admixture.

quote:

---

the E3b in Oromos and Amharas is *NOT* Caucasoid

---

Of course it is, silly. How else could both of those groups "appear quite similar to Europoids" and be "considerably different from the Negritic peoples"? And in light of that finding, how else to explain the fact that they're both "located in an intermediate position...between African and non-African populations."? Haplogroup J alone isn't enough to cause all that, especially in the Oromo (~4%). It's mainly the E3b, obviously.

posted 08 June 2005 08:41 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
Of course it is, silly. How else could both of those groups "appear quite similar to Europoids" and be "considerably different from the Negritic peoples"? And in light of that finding, how else to explain the fact that they're both "located in an intermediate position...between African and non-African populations."? Haplogroup J alone isn't enough to cause all that, especially in the Oromo (~4%). It's mainly the E3b, obviously.

You're living in a fantasy world.

---

Hey Guido, that study talking about Europids was dealing with enzymes you illiterate retard, not E3b, paternal nor maternal ancestry. You have provided no proof that E3b in Amharas and Oromos have anything to do with caucasoids or that it is Caucasoid. The source you keep spamming like the idiot your are says:

Considering the erythrocyte enzyme data, the Oromo and Amhara appear quite similar to Europoids (particularly to the South Arabians)

It says they are similar to South Arabians, but guess what you retarded guido, the E3b found in Amhara and Oromos is almost totally *ABSENT* in the Middle East including South Arabians, so idiot you're just talking garbage irrespective of the facts. However, my point is proven:

"The present-day Egyptian E3b-M35 distribution most likely results from a juxtaposition of various demic episodes. Since the E3b*-M35 lineages appear to be confined mostly to the sub-Saharan populations, it is conceivable that the initial migrations toward North Africa from the south primarily involved derivative E3b-M35 lineages. These include E3b1-M78, a haplogroup especially common in Ethiopia (23%), and, perhaps, E3b2-M123 (2%), which is present as well (Underhill et al. 2000; Cruciani et al. 2002; Semino et al. 2002)."

[Luis et tal, 2004]

Plus this:

"It is interesting that, like E3b1-M78, these mtDNA haplogroups are infrequent or absent in our Yemeni sample
(table 1)."

"Nevertheless, a clear asymmetry between E3b1-M78 and J1-M267 chromosomes is seen—the former are rare or absent in southern Arabia, whereas the latter are relatively
frequent. Hence, Ethiopians may have been recipients of the southern Arabian J1-M267 chromosomes but have not been efficient donors of the E3b1-M78 chromosomes to southern Arabia, although East Africans may have carried the latter to Egypt and, farther, to Europe via the Levantine corridor."

(Kivisild et tal, 2004)

Yes Erroneous fool, it came from a Europoid population in sub-Saharan Africa and like I've said the E3b1-M78 seen in Europeans is a derivative of East African specific E3b1-M78 that left Africa, went into the Levantine Corridor, and then was carried to Europe along with J lineages[J-M172] in Neolithic migrations. Thus your ridiculous claim that E3b is Caucasoid or Europoid has been debunked, refuted, hacked to pieces.

Once again, you've been

posted 09 June 2005 07:36 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Topdog:
Hey Guido, that study talking about Europids was dealing with enzymes you illiterate retard, not E3b, paternal nor maternal ancestry. You have provided no proof that E3b in Amharas and Oromos have anything to do with caucasoids or that it is Caucasoid.

---

posted 09 June 2005 08:03 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
Results using different approaches have to accord with one another. You can't argue that the Amhara and Oromo have only minor Caucasoid admixture based on haplogroup J when independent research finds that they're similar to Europoids and distinct from Negritic peoples, and located centrally between Africans and non-Africans as a result. There has to be more of a Caucasoid influence present, and it comes in the form of E3b, which gives both groups comparable admixture levels in the range of 40-50%.

---

Dumb Euro, restating the same debunked argument isn't getting you anywhere you retard. That study dealt with restriction enzymes[*NOT* E3b] which have nothing to do with race. Your E3b is Caucasoid argument has been refuted, you've been *OWNED*!

posted 09 June 2005 08:16 AM            

E3b* is sub-Saharan

Ethiopians carry a lineages of E3b-M35[E3b1-M78] which broke off from E3b*-M35

Europeans carry a derivative of E3b1-M78 which came from a migration *OUT OF AFRICA* into the Levant and spread into Europe.

posted 09 June 2005 08:53 AM            

pig-jizz needs to come and see this!

E3b is not "caucasoid". How can it be if it originated in Sub-Saharan Africa? How can it be if it is related to E3a?

posted 10 June 2005 07:32 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Topdog:
Dumb Euro, restating the same debunked argument isn't getting you anywhere you retard.

---

Debunked by whom? Your dumb black ass? Please. Post evidence refuting the finding that the Oromo and Amhara are both of mixed Europoid-Negritic descent.

quote:

---

the intermediate has been explained to so many times

---

Again, explained by whom? Afronut idiots? When we know that the Oromo and Amhara "appear quite similar to Europoids [and] considerably different from the Negritic peoples", the only way to explain their intermediate position is RACIAL ADMIXTURE.

quote:

---

Ethiopia lies in the middle, which supports Tischkoff et tal's hypothesis that...

---

...pre-historic East Africans were not black.

quote:

---

All studies *DO NOT HAVE TO* accord with one another

---

posted 10 June 2005 02:46 PM            

quote:

---

Debunked by whom? Your dumb black ass? Please. Post evidence refuting the finding that the Oromo and Amhara are both of mixed Europoid-Negritic descent.

---

Useless strawman argument you idiot, no one has ever stated that Oromos and Amharas have non-African mixture. The issue is whether E3b1-M78[East African derived] is caucasoid or came from Caucasoids, the answer of course is no you fool because E3b1-M78[again east African specific] arose *IN EAST AFRICA* and was derived from E3b* which is *SUB-SAHARAN*, so where in the hell do get the notion that it came from caucasoids you idiot? The second issue is that although both Oromo and Amharas have mixture, it is less represented in the former while being subtantial in the latter.

Retarded Euro wrote:

quote:

---

Again, explained by whom? Afronut idiots? When we know that the Oromo and Amhara "appear quite similar to Europoids

---

Those Europoids were identified as South Arabians you retarded guido and they brought no E3b lineages into East Africa. So-called 'racial mixture' between South Arabians amounts to 15% in Oromos to 30% in Amharas, how in the hell does spamming that study prove E3b is Caucasoid when it never came from South Arabia into Ethiopia? You can't read nor understand a damn study, thats why you selectively take bits and pieces of studies and resort to distortion

quote:

---

[and] considerably different from the Negritic peoples", the only way to explain their intermediate position is RACIAL ADMIXTURE.

---

Wrong again you dumb guido, this has told to your ignorant self again and again, read:

"The intermediate position, between African and non-African populations, that the Ethiopian Jews and Somalis occupy in the PCA plot also has been observed in other genetic studies (Ritte et al. 1993; Passarino et al. 1998) and could be due either to shared common ancestry or to recent gene flow. The fact that the Ethiopians and Somalis have a subset of the sub-Saharan African haplotype diversity and that the non-African populations have a subset of the diversity present in Ethiopians and Somalis makes simple-admixture models less likely; rather, these observations support the hypothesis proposed by other nuclear-genetic studies (Tishkoff et al. 1996a, 1998a, 1998b; Kidd et al. 1998)that populations in northeastern Africa may have diverged from those in the rest of sub-Saharan Africa early in the history of modern African populations and that a subset of this northeastern-African population migrated out of Africa and populated the rest of the globe. These conclusions are supported by recent mtDNA analysis (Quintana-Murci et al. 1999)."

http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/AJHG/journal/issues/v67n4/001733/001733.html

"However, the reduction in Tn diversity does suggest that a population bottleneck occurred in Ethiopia, associated with a major out of Africa expansion(s), which parallels the conclusion made by Tishkoff et al. (1996) from analysis of the CD4 locus. Certainly our data are not incompatible with the argument from Tishkoff et al. (1996) that an element of the contemporary Ethiopian population may be descendants of the ancestral population that spawned the migration out of Africa."

[Ethiopia: between Sub-Saharan Africa and Western Eurasia]

The information from the latter source goes on to say that only later was there admixture and as already discussed the mixture is lower in the Oromo(15%) and higher in the Amhara(30%). No one has ever denied mixture in both groups guido, but your stupid argument that E3b *MUST* be Caucasoid is based on selectively citing, misreading and distorting several genetic studies.

posted 12 June 2005 06:56 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
E3b is found at significant frequencies [b]only in fully Caucasoid groups like Kabyles, and partly Caucasoid groups like Ethiopians and Somalis. It is not found substantially in any unmixed Africans. This fact has yet to be refuted (because it can't be).[/B]

---

Guido, for the last time, E3b isn't Caucasoid and it is found in unmixed people like the Khoisan who have it in high frequencies. The point is that E3b is derived from sub-Saharan E3b* which isn't found in Caucasoids, so what are you rambling about mixed people for? What caucasoid group gave E3b to Ethiopians and Somalis you dumb guido? Published data support what *I* say, read it one more time stupid:

"The present-day Egyptian E3b-M35 distribution most likely results from a juxtaposition of various demic episodes. Since the E3b*-M35 lineages appear to be confined mostly to the sub-Saharan populations, it is conceivable that the initial migrations toward North Africa from the south primarily involved derivative E3b-M35 lineages. These include E3b1-M78, a haplogroup especially common in Ethiopia (23%), and, perhaps, E3b2-M123 (2%), which is present as well (Underhill et al. 2000; Cruciani et al. 2002; Semino et al. 2002)."

[Luis et tal, 2004]

Stupid Euro, get a life and quit saying stupid crap that makes no sense in the face of evidence. No Caucasoid population migrated north from sub-Saharan African bringing E3b1-M78 lineages into Ethiopia.

posted 12 June 2005 07:12 AM            

Ethiopia(greek name), for same location, Nubia(roman name), Kush(egyptian name) is what is North Sudan today.

Regards,

posted 12 June 2005 07:18 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by AMR1:
Today's Ethiopia is not ancient Ethiopia. That part of the world was called Abyssinia.

Ethiopia(greek name), for same location, Nubia(roman name), Kush(egyptian name) is what is North Sudan today.

Regards,

[This message has been edited by AMR1 (edited 12 June 2005).]

---

I'm well aware of that and this study is referring to modern Ethiopia, not the one referred to by the ancients.

posted 12 June 2005 07:32 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Topdog:
E3b isn't Caucasoid and it is found in unmixed people like the Khoisan

---

The Khoisan are not unmixed. They have lineages from all over Africa, including ancient (non-Negroid) A and B, as well as modern "Bantu" E3a. Their levels of E3b are generally low, and reflect a pre-historic connection with Northeast Africa.

The fact still stands . . .

posted 12 June 2005 07:38 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
The Khoisan are not unmixed. They have lineages from all over Africa, including ancient (non-Negroid) A and B, as well as modern "Bantu" E3a. Their levels of E3b are generally low, and reflect a pre-historic connection with Northeast Africa.

The fact still stands . . .

E3b is found at significant frequencies [b]only in fully Caucasoid North Africans like Kabyles, and partly Caucasoid East Africans like Ethiopians and Somalis. It is not found substantially in any unmixed Sub-Saharan Africans. This fact has yet to be refuted (because it can't be).[/B]

---

Fact still stands you retard, E3b* is not found in Caucasoids and E3b-M78 came from sub-saharans who migrated up north bringing derived e3b1-M78 lineages who originated from a E3b* population. None of your logic stands up to the facts.

posted 12 June 2005 08:05 AM            

quote:

---

Their levels of E3b are generally low, and reflect a pre-historic connection with Northeast Africa.

---

Khoisan have E3b*-M35 at a frequency of 30.8%, do you call that a *LOW* frequency? LOL, what an idiot!

posted 13 June 2005 07:47 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Topdog:
E3b* is not found in Caucasoids

---

It's found in partly Caucasoid East Africans.

quote:

---

Khoisan have E3b*-M35 at a frequency of 30.8%

---

And they're not unmixed sub-Saharan Africans or even "Blacks".

So the fact still stands . . .