posted 18 August 2005 01:22 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by yazid904:
My point is that from the British study the social construct of race, ethnicity coupled with ignorance skewed the results.

---

Frankly, the main problem you and few others are having with the study is that you simply don't understand it.

You don't understand what they did, why they did it, or what it means.

And this is indicated in all of your comments regarding it.

As evidenced by....

quote:

---

Here are some problems I see:

a. Asians (India/Pakistan?) are knows as blacks (generally) in UK while in US they are seen as honorary Caucasians, to say the least. Evidenced by lighter skin, higher social status and mobility in the latter.

---

Irrelevant to the study which is not sorting by racial construct, but rather by appearance. TopDog explained this, but you don't understand it, so.....

quote:

---

b. The pool of subjects labeled Afro-Caribbeans does not tell the whole story. e.g Most of Afro-Caribbeans in UK are Jamaicans. There are smaller group from other islands. If the researchers relied on place of birth (Caribbean) as ethnicity,

---

quote:

---

I am not saying that the results are wrong but if I have 2 separate results where the same genotype is associated with one group (per frequency) and another distinct result from that same E3a, then further isolation is needed to control for the problems associated with different pointers for the same E3a.

---

This is the difference between correlation - which can yield contradictory results, and cause and effect, which would be expected to yield consistent result regardless of context.

And the researches do not imply otherwise. Not their fault if people can't read, or understand what they are saying.

Frankly, SuperCar, TopDog, and a couple others show excellent grasp of the study.

You should re-read their replies until you understand them.

Just critical thinking.

posted 18 August 2005 01:24 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by leba:
^I thought he was talking about E3b in general. Which are rare and un-common in Bantu african countries such as Kenya and Tanzania.

[This message has been edited by leba (edited 18 August 2005).]

---

E3b is hypothesized to have arrived from the south bringing the downstream mutations. E3b without downstream mutations is common below Kenya.

posted 18 August 2005 01:24 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by leba:
^I thought he was talking about E3b in general. Which are rare and un-common in Bantu african countries such as Kenya and Tanzania.

---

Still, not right, but nevermind. You just go back to enraged mindless swearing and rantings. You're good at it.

posted 18 August 2005 03:34 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by leba:
Oromos in North Kenya came from Ethiopia you idiot. You dont know anything about East Africa. They(Borano's) themselves even claim roots from southern Ethiopia!!

[This message has been edited by leba (edited 18 August 2005).]

---

Oromo's come from Southern Ethiopia/Northern Kenya and migrated Northward.

Oromo Migration:

posted 18 August 2005 03:48 PM            

quote:

---

The Black African recent forefathers of Greeks.

---

ginney pussy moans:

quote:

---

It's L mtDNA which makes those savages look like that, not E3b.

---

Well, this is just another helpless wop cry [needless to say, squashed countless times now] from the total mental annihilation of having to deal with daily bombardment of facts.

posted 18 August 2005 03:55 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Horemheb:
Super Car, have another glass of koolaide. Your posts get more bizarre all the time.
do you actually think this stuff up?

---

posted 18 August 2005 03:59 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by osirion:
Oromo's come from Southern Ethiopia/Northern Kenya and migrated Northward.

Oromo Migration:

In the mid-sixteenth century, Ethiopia's political and military organization already weakened by the Muslim assault, the Christian kingdom began to be pressured on the south and southeast by movements of the Oromo (called Galla by the Amhara). These migrations also affected the Sidama, Muslim pastoralists in the lowlands, and Adal. At this time, the Oromo, settled in far southern Ethiopia, were an egalitarian pastoral people divided into a number of competing segments or groups but sharing a type of age-set system of social organization called the gada system, which was ideally suited for warfare. Their predilection toward warfare, apparently combined with an expanding population of both people and cattle, led to a long-term predatory expansion at the expense of their neighbors to the north after about 1550. Unlike the highland Christians or on occasion the lowland Muslims, the Oromo were not concerned with establishing an empire or imposing a religious system. In a series of massive but uncoordinated movements during the second half of the sixteenth century, they penetrated much of the southern and northern highlands as well as the lowlands to the east, affecting Christians and Muslims equally.

---

No, They migrated from Southern-Central Ethiopia.. Haha even in your own source they say nothing about north Kenya. This is really funny a westerner who doesn't know anything about east Africa talking about it like an expert

posted 18 August 2005 04:59 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by leba:
^^^Nilo-Saharans dont live in the horn of africa and never lived there

---

Wrong,

but at least you've stopped the hysterical vulgar ranting for the moment, so there is some progress being made here, apparently.

posted 18 August 2005 05:01 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Horemheb:
The African gene pool is so limited as to now be important.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

Ausar - the Egyptian with the facts.

Professor H - the American with no brain.

Prove us wrong and present some facts professor.

Otherwise, you're a clown and dismissed as such.

Your choice.

---

posted 18 August 2005 05:08 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
[b]Wrong,
[IMG][/IMG]
but at least you've stopped the hysterical vulgar ranting for the moment, so there is some progress being made here, apparently.
[/B]

---

Idiot, I said border regions such as west-Ethiopia and West-Eritrea Excluded! Damn you must be dumb.

posted 18 August 2005 05:22 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by leba:
I said border regions such as west-Ethiopia and West-Eritrea Excluded!

---

No, you didn't. You made the following false statement:

quote:

---

Nilo-Saharans dont live in the horn of africa and never lived there.

---

You can rephrase it,

requalify it,

or just choke on it,

and when you're done it will still be a lie.

Nilo Saharans dolive in the horn. Period.

You can go back to tantruming now.

posted 18 August 2005 05:29 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by leba:
Hmmmm Kenya is very Bantu and Nilo-Saharan.

Minority Groups: kikuyu (18 %), luyia (11,7 %), luo (11 %), kalenjin (8,4 %), kamba (8,4 %), gusii (5,4 %), meru (4,5 %), giryama (2,1 %), bukusu (2 %), lubukusu (2 %), embu (1,5 %), maasai (1,5 %), turkana (1,1 %), idakho (1 %), [b]somali (1 %), pokoot (1 %), duruma (0,8 %), digo (0,7 %), taita (0,7 %), teso (0,7 %), logooli (0,6 %), galla (0,5 %), borana (0,5 %), sabaot (0,5 %), samburu (0,5 %), swahili (0,5 %), tugen (0,5 %)
http://www.ethnonet-africa.org/data/kenya/genpop.htm [/B]

---

You smell like a Somali who have some Yemeni ancestry (like a rat): you know whom I'm talking about and you probably have the J haplogroup in you...don't dream you don't have E3b, please go back where you ancestors came from: Osama's land.
Relaxx

posted 18 August 2005 05:32 PM            

quote:

---

^^^Nilo-Saharans dont live in the horn of africa and never lived there. (border regions excluded).

---

*Nilo-Saharans are not found in Somalia.
*Nilo-Saharans are not found in Djibouti.
*Nilo-Saharans are not found in most of Ethiopia only on the west part near Sudan.
*Nilo-Saharans are not found in most of Eritrea only on the south west part.

quote:

---

Originally posted by relaxx:
[B] You smell like a Somali who have some Yemeni ancestry (like a rat): you know whom I'm talking about and you probably have the J haplogroup in you...don't dream you don't have E3b, please go back where you ancestors came from: Osama's land.
Relaxx

---

I'm not a somali you confused idiot. You still cant change the fact cushites make less then 2% of Kenya.

posted 18 August 2005 05:36 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by leba:
^^^Nilo-Saharans dont live in the horn of africa and never lived there

---

You just keep re-phrasing your lie. That's what most liars do when they are caught.

How embarrassing for you.,

The Kunama.

posted 18 August 2005 05:39 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by leba:
I wrote this you savage negroe black american stop cutting out stuff.

*Nilo-Saharans are not found in Somalia.
*Nilo-Saharans are not found in Djibouti.
*Nilo-Saharans are not found in most of Ethiopia only on the west part near Sudan.
*Nilo-Saharans are not found in most of Eritrea only on the south west part.

---

posted 18 August 2005 05:40 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by leba:
I wrote this you savage negroe black american stop cutting out stuff.

^^^Nilo-Saharans dont live in the horn of africa and never lived there. (border regions excluded).

*Nilo-Saharans are not found in Somalia.
*Nilo-Saharans are not found in Djibouti.
*Nilo-Saharans are not found in most of Ethiopia only on the west part near Sudan.
*Nilo-Saharans are not found in most of Eritrea only on the south west part.

---

posted 18 August 2005 05:42 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by relaxx:
I know for sure they don't have African ancestry.......Arab boy.
Relaxx

---

Lol. Agree. He was pretty easy to expose. What a loser.

posted 18 August 2005 05:42 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by leba:

I'm not a somali you confused idiot. You still cant change the fact cushites make less then 2% of Kenya.

---

posted 18 August 2005 08:14 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by leba:

^^Almost no Nilo-Saharans.

---

posted 18 August 2005 09:14 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by relaxx:
Only a guy with dubious big nosed Arab ancestry can write that...you're not even a pure Somali or Eastern African for that matter...Mr Hybrid. Relaxx

---

Also shows his EXTREME stupidity. The Kunama are shown in the very photo that set off his idiotic excuse making for his stupid statement that no Nilo Saharans live in the horn.

So what does he do?

He posts a map listing the Kunama among Horn populations.

posted 18 August 2005 09:29 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
Egyptsearch is dieing because extreme idiots like lead-head, are allowed to waste everyone's time.

---

We can attribute this to lack of security. It is safe to say that, if such a measure was available, people like Euro troll and his like would be long gone. There is just no way to communicate with these folks as though they were human beings; it is an impossible task, no matter how much hard one tries. These trolls are bent on only one thing: they don't like facts tossed at them and the fact that their fantasies are being squashed right before their eyes, and so, to get even (so they hope), they feel that the only alternative left for them, is to make others share their misery through ad hominem attacks.

posted 19 August 2005 02:11 AM            

"Eritrea consists of about three million people, who are mostly rural farmers and seminomadic pastoralists. Eritrean society is composed of approximately equal numbers of Christians and Muslims, who have shaped the basic identities of nine ethnic groups, speaking nine different languages. The nine languages can be grouped into three major language families: the Nilotic, the Cushitic, and the Afro-Semitic. The Nilotic languages in Eritrea are Nara and Kunama. The Nara- and the Kunama- speakers are believed to be the oldest of current inhabitants of the region; they speak two related but different languages."

posted 19 August 2005 06:19 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Topdog:
Leba must be on something:

"Eritrea consists of about three million people, who are mostly rural farmers and seminomadic pastoralists. Eritrean society is composed of approximately equal numbers of Christians and Muslims, who have shaped the basic identities of nine ethnic groups, speaking nine different languages. The nine languages can be grouped into three major language families: the Nilotic, the Cushitic, and the Afro-Semitic.[b] The Nilotic languages in Eritrea are Nara and Kunama. The Nara- and the Kunama- speakers are believed to be the oldest of current inhabitants of the region; they speak two related but different languages."

Nilotics, oldest of the current inhabitants of Eritrea[/B]

---

posted 19 August 2005 07:26 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by relaxx:
Topdog,
As you mentioned Nara are also Nilotic speakers, but it seems that even in Ethiopia they are among the most ancient groups, is there any source regarding that, moreover beside Oromo and Amhara, are there other people with more ancient genes (Haplogroup A and B). Amhara since to have more ancient genes than Oromo even though they have more foreign admixture, it seems that there is an 'indigenous' population that has probably a much higher proportion of ancient genes, but who are they? Unfortunately scientific research focus more on Oromos and Amharas. What about Southern Ethiopian people like the Surma and surrounding ethnic groups? What do we know about them genitically?
Relaxx

---

The Surma people of Sudan do have substantial E3b lineages, however, I cannot remember the exact study where this is stated. The Nara and Kunama are Nilotic speakers but do not look all that much different from other Eritreans, minus the Arab Rashaida people who are recent migrants.

Nara woman

posted 19 August 2005 07:43 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Babbling Ape:
the catagories do not attempt to relate phenotypically defined races.

---

Incorrect. In fact, your whole "interpretation" of that study is distorted Afronut nonsense. What the study actually says is that both groups EA1 and EA2 are "Caucasian", which attests to the similar affiliations of haplogroups R1b, I, J and E3b dating back to Upper Paleo- and Mesolithic times (the periods of race formation). The "light" and "dark" split reflects more recent correlations resulting from later Holocene adaptations to respectively cloudy (Northern European) and sunny (Southern European) climates.

This is all confirmed by the existence of Basques, who are genetically EA1 (i.e. "light") but phenotypically dark (because of their Southern European location), and also by the fact that "African" E3b Y-chromosomes make East Africans less African and more Eurasian -- both genetically and phenotypically.

R.I.P.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super coon:
E3b originated among those people, right there, in that photo above

---

posted 19 August 2005 08:15 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Topdog:
Leba must be on something:

"Eritrea consists of about three million people, who are mostly rural farmers and seminomadic pastoralists. Eritrean society is composed of approximately equal numbers of Christians and Muslims, who have shaped the basic identities of nine ethnic groups, speaking nine different languages. The nine languages can be grouped into three major language families: the Nilotic, the Cushitic, and the Afro-Semitic. The Nilotic languages in Eritrea are Nara and Kunama. The Nara- and the Kunama- speakers are believed to be the oldest of current inhabitants of the region; they speak two related but different languages."

Nilotics, oldest of the current inhabitants of Eritrea[/B]

---

Complete idiots like Erroneous Euro and Leba Leadhead hang about places like Dodona and wreck what's left of their already feeble minds.

When they expose themselves to the real world they are just laughed at, and held in contempt, along with their "Y chromosome carrying mail order brides", and other forms of self delusion.

It's the resulting humiliation leaves them tossing their tantrums, much like infants who wet their diapers.

posted 19 August 2005 08:22 AM            

quote:

---

TopDog writes: The Surma people of Sudan do have substantial E3b lineages

---

Underhill 2000 found E3b at about 30% in the Surma and the Berta. They also have the oldest East AFrican lineages like A, which also links them to the Oromo, the Borana, the Falasha and SouthEast African Nilotes, Kushites and Khoisan speakers Africans like Hadza, Sandawe, Datoga, Masai, Iraqw, Khwe and others.

E3a and thus west/central african ancestry is negligible among Horn/Sudan groups like the Berta and Surma.

posted 19 August 2005 08:29 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Topdog:
"
What about Cameroonian with high frequencies of R*.

---

From the study:

Y chromosomes are the single most informative marker of biogeographical origin, but they only represent patrilineal ancestry and can therefore be misleading if the possibility of admixture and clinal changes in allele frequencies between source population areas are not considered.

This study was done among a sample of populations in Britain and so divided into 6 groups, note: these 6 groups do not correspond to 'races', but ethnic groups based on physical appearance. Both native European groups are referenced as 'caucasians in this study'; but Middle Easterners are not.

What they are called is irrelevant. What is significant is how and why they are separated one from the other.

1) pale skinned Europeans Ea1, [negligible E3a and E3b]

2) dark skinned Europeans, Ea2 [24% E3a and E3b]

3) Afro-Carribean, Ea3

4) South Asian, Ea4

5) East Asian, Ea5

6) Middle Eastern, Ea6

In another country - Cameroon for instance - this clustering scheme would not be applicable, and the author's don't imply otherwise.

That is - those 6 groups don't exist in Cameroon.

In Cameroon R1 might correlate with darker taller African phenotype, whereas a lack of R1 might associate with the smaller lighter Baka. [Pygme]

But because correlation is not cause the results for Cameroon can not be applied to Britain, or vice versa, obviously.

What is of passing interest in terms of their findings is the distinction they draw between group 1 - pale europeans, and group 2, dark europeans.

The finding of 24% African Y chromsome among their native 'dark whites' of Europe [7% E3a and 17% E3b] is much as one would expect: in spite of the occasional propaganda to the effect that there is no E3A among Europeans.

In contrast the Ea1 pale-whites found to have negligible E3a and E3b in this study, will doubtless be of propaganda benefit to the Nordacists, who have always claimed that the dark skin of southern Europeans was 'proof' of African admixture.

This is why the Medi-centrists are foolish to advocate any conception of racial purity, as that is the one thing they most certainly are not.

Most Southern Europeans know this, acknowledge it, and so do not need to grovel in whiney denial like Dienekes and his fanboy.

posted 19 August 2005 09:25 AM            

quote:

---

that "African" E3b Y-chromosomes make East Africans less African and more Eurasian -- both genetically and phenotypically.

---

Sanchez et tal never stated that E3b Y-chromosones make East Africans 'less-African' and 'more Eurasian', only a babbling idiot who distorts and misrepresents studies can come to such a lame conclusion. stupid idiot, its been explained to you ad-naseum that E3b is East Africans have nothing to do with contact from Eurasians, I'm not going to repeat the same crap and run around in circles with you.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
Nope. Those people have recent "Niger-Congo" maternal ancestry (Passarino et al. 1998) that wasn't present in the original E3b-carrying East African population (Howells, 1995).

---

posted 19 August 2005 10:47 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by leba:
No, They migrated from Southern-Central Ethiopia.. Haha even in your own source they say nothing about north Kenya. This is really funny a westerner who doesn't know anything about east Africa talking about it like an expert

[This message has been edited by leba (edited 18 August 2005).]

---

What part of "far Southern Ethiopia" does your lack of English not allow your Arabized prejudice not to comprehend?

>>>>>Britannica

Oromo, a Cushitic-speaking pastoralist people whose original homeland was located on the Sidamo-Borena plain. From there, the related Afar and Somali peoples had hived off northeastward to the Red Sea coast, the Indian Ocean, and the Gulf of Aden.

>>>>>>>

Now we can argue over where the Borena plains stop and start and how much of it is in Kenya -vs- Ethiopia but the point is that Oromos migrated Northeastward.

Where I come from, England, Southern East Indian people are considered Black so most definately so are the Oromos and your Somalis.

Stupid East African politics. What a joke, the English helped establish the Amhara Black empire? We simply helped them take back their country from the Italians. The Amhara rule of Ethiopia didn't need European assistance. The Coptic Christian Amhara have been ruling Ethiopia for hundreds of years if not thousands. And the idea that the Amhara are Black and the Oromos aren't? Good grief I can't understand the stupidity. I don't know what Arabization does to people but if it makes them strap bombs on themselves and blow themselves up it most certainly lower ones IQ first. When are the East African people going to shake off the debacle and infestation of Arabization and regain their historical glory? Can't believe the brainwashing and it is so prevalent where ever Islam travels.

If Islamist convert a few Australian natives, I am sure they will get it in their head that they are actually not Australian but somehow are related to Mohammed and only the non-Muslim natives are Aboriginies.

When is this stupid racist agenda going to be seen for what it is.

posted 19 August 2005 12:22 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
Nope. Those people have recent "Niger-Congo" maternal ancestry (Passarino et al. 1998) that wasn't present in the original E3b-carrying East African population (Howells, 1995).

---

What was this Caucasian mtDNA and where did it go?

posted 19 August 2005 01:37 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
Also shows his EXTREME stupidity. The Kunama are shown in the very photo that set off his idiotic excuse making for his stupid statement that no Nilo Saharans live in the horn.

So what does he do?

He posts a map listing [b]the Kunama among Horn populations.

Egyptsearch is dieing because extreme idiots like lead-head, are allowed to waste everyone's time.[/B]

---

Ha! Ha! Ha!
If I were him I wouldn't even come back to this board. Rasol catches em all the time. Whether u know it or not you are one of my teachers.

posted 19 August 2005 02:31 PM            

quote:

---

ginney pussy:
Nope. Those people have recent "Niger-Congo" maternal ancestry (Passarino et al. 1998) that wasn't present in the original E3b-carrying East African population (Howells, 1995).

---

Bushy med-wop primitive, now there is no such thing as "Niger Congo" ancestry (countless studies, and recently Sanchez et al. 2005) in Cushitic speakers [especially the Boranas], the "original" bearers of E3b1, with the highest frequencies in the Borana (Cruciani et al. 2004); it is just the figment of imagination of mentally stressed med-wop bushman.

But like I said, these folks, i.e., Boranas…

posted 19 August 2005 05:10 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by osirion:

You know they do look kinda Caucasian if you think about it. If you think real hard, I mean real hard. There's just something Greek about them.

---

LOl. Populations don't have to ressemble each other, to have a common recent ancestry. Unfortunately, some misguided folks think that the male sex chromosome determines facial characteristics and skin tone. Human genome isn't only made up of male and female sex chromosome, there is a lot more to it than that overly simplistic view.

posted 19 August 2005 05:34 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by osirion:

You know they do look kinda Caucasian if you think about it. If you think real hard, I mean real hard. There's just something Greek about them.

---

posted 20 August 2005 07:52 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Babbling Ape:
Most Southern Europeans know this, acknowledge it, and so do not need to grovel in whiney denial like Dienekes and his fanboy.

---

1) A single website with an agenda does not constitute "most Southern Europeans"; and 2) that section is about the African origins of humanity, you illiterate spook. It does nothing to support your embarrassing misreading of Wetton's study.

* EA1 (R1b/I) and EA2 (E3b/J2/G) = Both Caucasoid

* "Pale" and "Dark" = Recent climatic adaptations

This desperate need to be associated with Europeans only exposes the Negro's keen awareness of his own inferiority, and deep shame about his underachievement. In other words, it's doing you more harm than good, savage. Take my advice and quit now before every last shred of your dignity is gone.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Topdog:
Sanchez et tal never stated that E3b Y-chromosones make East Africans 'less-African' and 'more Eurasian'

---

"The data suggest that the male Somali population is a branch of the East African population -- closely related to the Oromos in Ethiopia and North Kenya -- predominant E3b1 [...] East Africans are more related to Eurasians than to other African populations." (Sanchez et al. 2005)

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super coon:
there is no such thing as "Niger Congo" ancestry

---

"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 20 August 2005 08:40 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
"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)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

Smashing Deniekes and racial reality seem like child's play and almost beneath you.

---

posted 20 August 2005 04:17 PM            

quote:

---

ginney pussy:
"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)

---

medwop bitch, don’t take this too personal, when I say that this is just wop scavenge of pointless bits and pieces of outmoded concepts; racial purity is a wop figment of imagination, but let’s not allow that to distract us from dealing with the sham you presented…

Now guess who criticizes the debunked Passarino et a1. 1998, study? No other than Semino, who was implicated in that very same Passarino et al study, and here’s what he, himself, had to say about it:

“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.**” - Semino et al. 2001.

…which of course in line with the Oromos and the Amharas never clustering into one, in any Y chromosome or mtDNA representation.

Notwithstanding that this antiquated sham of Passarino et al. has been pointed out countless times now, what mtDNA haplotypes are considered “Niger Congo”, and what does this have to do with the Borana, who mainly live in northern Kenya?

quote:

---

ginney pussy:
"The data suggest that the male Somali population is a branch of the East African population -- closely related to the Oromos in Ethiopia and North Kenya -- predominant E3b1 [...] East Africans are more related to Eurasians than to other African populations." (Sanchez et al. 2005)

---

...an incoherent wop patchwork of unrelated pieces of words, in the hope to deceive…itself.

Somalis being a branch of East African population, is apparently immaterial to this incoherent wop patchwork, and so,

"**provide the context in which Sanchez et al make that statement**, which does support the aforementioned statement!"

You haven’t done so, and won’t do so, because you are quite aware that it is just a toothless ginney pussy baloney. hussy, stick to what you pasta munching dykes do best, i.e., whoring! http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/Forum8/HTML/002436.html

Face it, ginney mule, when you look at this,

...you are staring at your forefathers,i.e., the ‘original’ bearers of E3b1. None of those wop nuggets presented here, are material to the fact.

posted 20 August 2005 04:39 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
"The data suggest that the male Somali population is a branch of the East African population -- closely related to the Oromos in Ethiopia and North Kenya -- predominant E3b1 [...] East Africans are more related to Eurasians than to other African populations." (Sanchez et al. 2005)

---

What a dumb wanker you are for intentionally misrepresenting Sanchez et tal's study. Here is why East Africans are more related to Eurasians and it has nothing to do with E3b1 making them more Eurasian you idiot:

"East Africans are more related to Eurasians than to other African populations. Investigations of Y chromosome
markers have shown that the East African populations were not significantly affected by the east bound Bantu expansion that took place approximately 3500 years ago, while a
significant contact to Arab and Middle East populations can be deduced from the present distribution of the Y chromosomes in these areas. The Y chromosome haplogroup E3a is found at high frequencies in the sub-
Saharan, Bantu-speaking populations but at low frequencies in East Africa, while Eurasian haplogroups like J and K are found at various frequencies in East Africa."

Now from reading this entire passage and not resorting to your patchwork distortion methods, we can see that Sanchez et tal considers East Africans more related Eurasians because East Africans have *NOT* been significantly affected by contact with E3a carriers while being affected by haplogroups J and K carriers from the Middle East. Thus, since they have been more impacted by the latter[Middle Easterners as represented by haplogroups J and K which is understandable due to their geographical proximity ] and less by E3a it makes sense that he would say East Africans share a closer relationship with Eurasians, at no point does he ever give the impression that E3b1 makes East Africans more Eurasian. You're a stupid distorter and as usual, your inability to read as well as your propensity to distort[you even put your distortion backwards] have exposed you for the babbling idiot you are. Go back to school and learn reading comprehension you fool.

posted 20 August 2005 05:25 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Topdog:
What a dumb wanker you are for intentionally misrepresenting Sanchez et tal's study. Here is why East Africans are more related to Eurasians and it has nothing to do with E3b1 making them more Eurasian you idiot:

"East Africans are more related to Eurasians than to other African populations.

Investigations of Y chromosome
markers have shown that the East African populations were not significantly affected by the east bound Bantu expansion that took place approximately 3500 years ago, while a
significant contact to Arab and Middle East populations can be deduced from the present distribution of the Y chromosomes in these areas.

The Y chromosome haplogroup E3a is found at high frequencies in the sub-
Saharan, Bantu-speaking populations but at low frequencies in East Africa, while Eurasian haplogroups like J and K are found at various frequencies in East Africa."

Now from reading this entire passage and not resorting to your patchwork distortion methods, we can see that Sanchez et tal considers East Africans more related Eurasians because East Africans have *NOT* been significantly affected by contact with E3a carriers while being affected by haplogroups J and K carriers from the Middle East. Thus, since they have been more impacted by the latter[Middle Easterners as represented by haplogroups J and K which is understandable due to their geographical proximity ] and less by E3a it makes sense that he would say East Africans share a closer relationship with Eurasians, at no point does he ever give the impression that E3b1 makes East Africans more Eurasian...Go back to school and learn reading comprehension you fool.

---

You are of course correct that the statement has no bearing on the closer genetic relationship b/n haplogroups E3b and E3a than they do with either Hg J or Hg K (as indicated by the polymorphisms of the haplogroups themselves), the contrary of which, is what ginney pussy wishes to sabotage the study for.

As you pointed out, the Eurasian input into the Somali is relatively more than those from other sub-Saharan Africans, but we can see that it is still insignificant, in comparison to the indigenous sub-Saharan E3b lineages…

"…cluster ã lineages that were introduced into the Somali population 4000-5000 years ago, and that the Somali male population has approximately 15% Y chromosomes from Eurasia and approximately 5% from sub-Saharan Africa…."

…but, we know that:

“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**”

And from Rasol’s faithful interpretation of the study, we have:

It does one no good to quote from abstracts when you can't understand what is being said, to begin with.

Relatedness by Y chromosome per Sanchez plot:

Oromo 0
Ethiopian 2
Somali 2.5
Sudan 3.5
Amhara 5.5
North African 6
Khoisan 7.5
Egyptitan 8.5
Central AFrican 9
Bantu 12
Omani 14

The Omani are only as close as they are because of their African Y chromsome, without which they would be off the upper right corner of Sanchez graph

posted 20 August 2005 06:05 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

This study was done among a sample of populations in Britain and so divided into 6 groups, note: these 6 groups do not correspond to 'races', but ethnic groups based on physical appearance. Both native European groups are referenced as 'caucasians in this study'; but Middle Easterners are not.

What they are called is irrelevant. What is significant is how and why they are separated one from the other.

1) pale skinned Europeans Ea1, [negligible E3a and E3b]

2) dark skinned Europeans, Ea2 [24% E3a and E3b]

3) Afro-Carribean, Ea3

4) South Asian, Ea4

5) East Asian, Ea5

6) Middle Eastern, Ea6...

What is of passing interest in terms of their findings is the distinction they draw between group 1 - pale europeans, and group 2, dark europeans.

The finding of 24% African Y chromsome among their native 'dark whites' of Europe [7% E3a and 17% E3b] is much as one would expect: in spite of the occasional propaganda to the effect that there is no E3A among Europeans.

In contrast the Ea1 pale-whites found to have negligible E3a and E3b in this study, will doubtless be of propaganda benefit to the Nordacists, who have always claimed that the dark skin of southern Europeans was 'proof' of African admixture.

This is why the Medi-centrists are foolish to advocate any conception of racial purity, as that is the one thing they most certainly are not.

Most Southern Europeans know this, acknowledge it, and so do not need to grovel in whiney denial like Dienekes and his fanboy.

---