posted 24 August 2005 02:17 PM            

quote:

---

ginney pussy:
E3b and J cause East Africans to cluster closer to groups like Mediterranean Europeans than they do to Sub-Saharan Africans:

---

Yeap, ginney ho, it is indeed these foreign lineages in Meds, i.e., sub-Saharan E3b and J lineages that bring Meds closer to these folks, a per Richards et al. Contrast this with an earlier grotesquely senseless wop notion of this phenomenon to mean that, sub-Saharan Hg E3b is genetically closer to Hg J and Hg R, which is undoubtedly not the position of any study/bio-anthropolgist.

BTW, it is generally a good idea to think of the son, as taking after the father, not the vice versa; simply means that, E3b flowed from the sub-Saharans to the Meds, bringing them Meds closer to the former. Just a quick pointer for a mentally dead wop.

posted 24 August 2005 02:44 PM            

Get it straight you guys.

If Greeks are indeed mixed then they should plot closer to Somalian types from whence this mixture originates. This would also move them slightly away from the Nordic types common in Europe.

Is this not the case?

posted 24 August 2005 03:14 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by leba:

---

Interesting Estimates.

Estimates = pseudo-science.

Ignored.

posted 24 August 2005 03:19 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Horemheb:
This is not the case. The Greeks are just as caucasian as the germans. They are of Indo European origin.

---

Lots of Greeks in Surrey and Croydon in England, they remind me or Arabs rather than English or Swedes. A lot of them are more like us Jews than the rest of Europe. Primarily though, they are definately Caucasian but that doesn't mean they aren't a bit mixed.

posted 24 August 2005 04:16 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by osirion:
Interesting Estimates.
Estimates = pseudo-science.
Ignored.

---

Good Call. Phoney map from a notorious fraud.

posted 24 August 2005 04:36 PM            

once again Somalies are......

*Not cascaoid

*negroid

*Or hybrid of the two

posted 24 August 2005 05:18 PM            

Again: Caucasian is IndoEuropean. Cushitic people are African people and originate in Africa period. There has been some back gene drift into Africa which is evident by J Hg. There is also European mtDNA in Africa but this is due to a slave trade and overrun European colonies. So either you guys who are calling Ethiopians and Somalians Caucasian are redefining the meaning of Caucasian to a point of uselessness or you are flat out wrong. I think it is the latter but perhaps its both.

Again look at the migration patterns of people via the Genographic project. Kind of evident which group is Caucasian and there migration path.

Just click on the Atlas (its not rocket science)

https://www5.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/

posted 25 August 2005 07:48 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Topdog:
Look where Eurasians like Omanis, Iraqis, and Turks cluster and look where East Africans cluster you idiot, there is a difference.

---

Somalis (~80% E3b) are nearly as distant from the E3a-carrying populations as Eurasians are. Other East Africans who are less distant have more E3a, E* and A than Somalis. E3b-carriers are clearly not genetically Sub-Saharan African, as Sanchez correctly points out.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super coon:
Well, ginney ho pussy, this forced admission that there are indeed differences, is all we need.

---

No, spook. That's been my position all along.

quote:

---

Sanchez et al.'s map demonstrates that Oromos and Amharas don't cluster into one

---

Incorrect, blind ape. Despite minor differences, both are about equally distant from the Negroid populations.

quote:

---

...or I take it that it is finished business, as per your no-answers

---

Answers to what? Those quotes about Neolithic ancestry in Europe? Already been covered.

quote:

---

Originally posted by osirion:
Interesting Estimates.

Estimates = pseudo-science.

Ignored.

---

You = Ignoramus

While that particular map is not the best because it's based on ABD's often inaccurate results, this one based on a study from a peer-reviewed journal is perfectly fine and the Afronuts' worst nightmare:

Based on an analysis of 377 autosomal DNA markers in 1,064 individuals. (Rosenberg et al. 2002)

NOTE:

1) Groupings correspond to anthropological races: Caucasoid, Negroid, Mongoloid, Australoid and Amerind.

2) All Western Europeans (North and South) are more than 98% Caucasoid, including Italians with 12%-22% E3b.

3) The single North African sample is Mozabite Berbers; they have 80% E3b yet are only 23% Negroid.

4) The Bantu of Kenya (14% E3b) are 9% Caucasoid. The Borana (86% E3b) would surely be much more so.

posted 25 August 2005 07:54 AM            

quote:

---

Southeastern Europeans are a mix of Paleolithic hunter-gatherers and Neolithic agriculturalists -- both Caucasoid and both "dark" from adaptating to the Mediterranean climate.

Of course, the high frequency of E3a in Wetton's sample comes from intermarriage with Afro-Caribbeans within the U.K., as that haplogroup has never been detected in Greece or Sicily.

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:

---

WETTON:

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

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

PROOF:

~80% E3b + Caucasoid mtDNA =

~80% E3b + Negroid mtDNA =

~95% R1b/I + European mtDNA =

R.I.P.

---

quote:

---

E3b and J cause East Africans to cluster closer to groups like Mediterranean Europeans than they do to Sub-Saharan Africans:

Mediterranean Europeans always cluster with non-Mediterranean Europeans:

And of course, these genetic relationships manifest themselves craniometrically as well:

[ #4 = English; #7 = Greek; #10 = Swiss ]

R.I.P.

---

They'd better hurry up. Their time is running out . . .

posted 25 August 2005 09:45 AM            

quote:

---

Relatedness by Y chromosome per Sanchez plot with Oromo as baseline:

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

---

quote:

---

Cobra writes: once again Somalies are......

*Not cascaoid

*negroid

*Or hybrid of the two

---

This is correct, as racial typologies such as caucaZoid and negroid are outdated, non scientific and irrelevant as applied to Somali or any other people.

posted 25 August 2005 09:59 AM            

quote:

---

Southeastern Europeans are a mix of Paleolithic hunter-gatherers and Neolithic agriculturalists

---

Should read:

Southeastern Europeans are a mixture of the following heterogeneous elements:

* Primative paleolithic and therefore indigenous hunter-gatherers from Europe - these lineages are represented by haplogroup I and R1b.

* Neolithic migrant farmers from East Africa, represented by haplotype E3b...and West Asia, represented by Haplotype J.

Once the above is understood, and the hysterical and futile denials are set aside, we can begin to understand European history, with the assistance of Professor Chistopher Ehret:

People who study world history usually begin with the origins of agriculture. There are at least seven or eight ­ maybe eleven to thirteen ­ world regions which independently invented agriculture. None in Europe.

We actually have DNA evidence which fits very well with an intrusion of people from northeastern Africa into southwestern Asia. The Y-chromosome markers, associated with the male, fade out as you go deeper into the Middle East.

posted 25 August 2005 10:02 AM            

i heard so mush about this site.

posted 25 August 2005 10:42 AM            

80% E3b + Caucasoid mtDNA =

Your argument is defeated and it becomes even more apparent that you are just making **** up as you go. Honestly, if you don't like the objective fact that southern europeans obviously have very recent african admixture then kill youself; put yourself out of your horrible misery instead of outright lying and distorting. You're evidently BRAIN DEAD by you arguments and obvious distortions!

posted 25 August 2005 11:19 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
Somalis (~80% E3b) are nearly as distant from the E3a-carrying populations as Eurasians are.

---

80% [b]E3b1 carrying Somali males are distant from both Eurasians and sub-Saharan west Africans but lie in the negative pole along with SSW Africans. The point is that their E3b1 lineages do *NOT* make them more Eurasian you idiot, other they would form a tight cluster with Eurasians. The Amhara and Oromo when *NOT* pooled together do *NOT* tightly cluster with each other for the reason that Amharas have higher levels of J lineages, which supports Semino et tal. Thus higher J lineages, *NOT* E3b1, draws some East African groups closer to Eurasians you idiot.

posted 25 August 2005 12:55 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
[B] You = Ignoramus

While that particular map is not the best because it's based on ABD's often inaccurate results, this one based on a study from a peer-reviewed journal is perfectly fine and the Afronuts' worst nightmare:

---

If you admit that the map is incorrect then why call me an Ignoramous?

posted 25 August 2005 01:04 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by osirion:
If you admit that the map is incorrect then why call me an Ignoramous?

---

Go easy on poor Baby Euro.

He's having a hard time.

Everyone has realised that he's simply a dull bulb.

He's starting to face that fact himself which means this is a dangerous time for him.

Keins is right, EE should probably be on suicide watch right about now.

posted 25 August 2005 01:42 PM            

quote:

---

ginney pussy:
That's been my position all along.

---

Well then, ginney ho, if that is your position all along, then the matter is settled:

Why bother with a jabbering wop corpse, whose poor judgment leads it to conclude that this person below, according to the wop’s own words, is a “East Africans with ~80% E3b:”?…

…when we have:
"A wop's subjective opinion on what is considered significant or not, is immaterial to conclusions of studies from Sanchez, Semino & a great many others, which have all unequivocally shown that there are indeed significant differences in levels of sub-Saharan E3b lineages and foreign (Asian) gene flow. It correlates well with their different histories. For instance, Sanchez et al.'s map demonstrates that Oromos and Amharas don't cluster into one; their positions are clearly defined on the map, which is of course significant...and has proven to be a devastating wop myth buster."

quote:

---

ginney pussy:
Despite minor differences, both are about equally distant from the Negroid populations

---

Immaterial, ginney ho! What is relevant here, is that as Sanchez et al.’s map clearly show that…"Oromos and Amharas don't cluster into one; their positions are clearly defined on the map, which is of course significant."

We weren’t discussing these 2 groups with other Africans (that discussion is another wop’s figment), but we were discussing their relationship with one another. So guess who’s blind illiterate after all? ….it is that nattering wop corpse, ‘spinning’ senselessly in circles.

quote:

---

ginney pussy:
Answers to what? Those quotes about Neolithic ancestry in Europe?
Already been covered.

---

I see that ginney pussy has no comprehension of plain English. No matter, here are the specifics of the "unanswered" questions:

quote:

---

Richards et al:

"The second PC of Y chromosome variation accounts for 26% of the variation, and it clusters most European regions at one pole while grouping the Near East at the other, with eastern Mediterranean and central Mediterranean Europe between the two poles. The main contributors to the gradients are **haplogroups E** and J (formerly haplogroups 21 and 9, both of which are frequent in the Near East) and, again, R* and N3 (both of which are more frequent in Europe). This points to gene flow from the Near East, as suggested by both Cavalli-Sforza et al. (1994) and Semino et al. (2000). Haplogroup J in Europe is interpreted more specifically by Semino et al. (2000) as the result of Neolithic dispersal. 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…
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/Forum8/HTML/002445.html

As Richards et al demonstrated, the presence of recent sub-Saharan Hg E and Asian Hg J in dark skin outlier medwops, pulls them away from the REAL Europeans, and puts them in b/n the Near Easterners (who carry the same sub-Saharan and Asian lineages amongst others) and the REAL Europeans. But varying frequencies of Hg R and Hg N3 in outlier dark skin meds, keeps them in the middle.

So now that every single wop straw has been squashed swiftly and concisely, emotionally fragile ginney retard, how about answers for the following:

• What haplotypes are considered “Niger Congo” mtDNA in the Ethiopian gene pool? Where is the Borana sample that Passarino et al, 1998, studied? And what does “Niger Congo” lineages have to do with the Borana?

• The E3b1 lineages in East African populations, with highest found in Cushitic speakers like the Borana, are indigenous sub-Sahara tropical African lineages. How does admixture or gene flow into east Africa, disqualify this fact any way?

• Recent E3b lineages in southern Europe, including E3a and HBS are all sub-Saharan. These people are genetically closer to sub-Saharan Africans, than the non-outlier Europeans carrying Hg R1b and Hg I in high frequencies. Where does Sanchez et al., 2005, state that E3b is genetically closer to Eurasian J and K, more than its sister PN2 E3a?
  

---

Does anyone else see anything about your hybrid Neolithic ancestors in the above ‘questions’? It must be the figment of that wandering & nattering wop corpse,
…or I take it that it is finished business, as per your no-answers, i.e., ginney pussy being toast!

Gist: That is why, one of the first things an undocumented ginney hussy immigrant needs to do [aside from getting a brain cell], is to learn English, and then try to fit within the mentally ‘living’ world.

quote:

---

Topdog:
80% E3b1 carrying Somali males are distant from both Eurasians and sub-Saharan west Africans but lie in the negative pole along with SSW Africans. The point is that their E3b1 lineages do *NOT* make them more Eurasian you idiot, other they would form a tight cluster with Eurasians. The Amhara and Oromo when *NOT* pooled together do *NOT* tightly cluster with each other for the reason that Amharas have higher levels of J lineages, which supports Semino et tal. Thus higher J lineages, *NOT* E3b1, draws some East African groups closer to Eurasians you idiot.

---

None of which of course, has any bearings on E3b sub-Saharans and outlier Meds, being genetically close to PN2 E3a sub-Saharans, and distant from REAL Europeans.

Its time for the chattering wop corpse to R.I.P.

posted 25 August 2005 03:47 PM            

For instance,

pussy of a ginney ho infers:

quote:

---

WETTON:

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

---

To term it in a way that makes ginney feel better, perhaps, is that the Wetton revelation shows that the so-called “caucasoid” EA2, are simply outliers with higher frequencies of **foreign lineages**, i.e., Black African Hg E lineages and Asian Js:

quote:

---

Compared with the EA1 dataset **EA2 population shows higher frequencies of haplogroups with North African and Middle Eastern origins such as E3b, J2, and G** along with those that have spread from further east in Asia such as L and H; these haplogroups are characteristic of south-eastern Europe.

---

And also..

quote:

---

However, the frequent occurrence (7%) of the **E3a sub-Saharan African haplogroup** that has previously been shown to be virtually absent from the indigenous UK and European populations [23,24] suggests recent admixture with Afro-Caribbeans in the UK, **resulting in an association between African Y chromosomes and a Caucasian appearance.**”

---

These are all answers, readily available in this thread; commitment to literacy is the key to understanding them.

posted 25 August 2005 06:40 PM            

quote:

---

To term it in a way that makes ginney feel better, perhaps, is that the Wetton revelation shows that the so-called “caucasoid” EA2, are simply outliers with higher frequencies of **foreign lineages**, i.e., Black African Hg E lineages and Asian Js:

---

That is exactly the case. The study sorts into precisely 6 distinct ethnic appearance {EA} groups.

Ea1 [pale Europeans] is essentially native European and described as homogeneous in appearance as well as genetic lineage.

Ea2 [dark Europeans] is a combination of European, African and West Asian and so described as heterogeneous.

Heterogeneous means Consisting of dissimilar elements or parts.

In this case heterogeneous means that EA2 has substantial paternity from the lineages that define group Ea3 [Afro-Caribbean] and Ea6 [Mid-Eastern].

Simplifying, Wetton is saying that pale whites of Northern Europe and dark whites of the medit are not only two different looking EA or ethnic appearance groups, but that they have two very different ancestries, one overwhelmingly European - the other European, African and West Asian.

You can call these two different groups "Aryans" if it makes you feel better -I believe facist Mussolini was the 1st to white-wash medit. diversity by declaring that Italians were 'Aryan', but it simply has no bearing on the actual ethnic appearance and genetic distinctiveness related by Wetton.

Frankly, there is nothing in this study that we did not know, before it was conducted, just some things that are denied and were again revealed [par for the course], such as E3a from West Africa showing up in Medits, yet again. As with L lineages [over 11% in parts of Portugal], Dienekes and co. keep denying it, only to have it turn up again, in study after study.

posted 25 August 2005 10:42 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

You can call these two different groups "Aryans" if it makes you feel better -I believe facist Mussolini was the 1st to white-wash medit. diversity by declaring that Italians were 'Aryan', but it simply has no bearing on the actual ethnic appearance and genetic distinctiveness related by Wetton.

---

posted 25 August 2005 11:58 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super car:
You are on point. Only insecure outlier Med Europeans, follow their anti-human fascist idol Mussolini, thinking that if they throw racist slurs at others and kiss reactionary "Aryan" ass, that this would suddenly earn them the membership of the "Aryan race". I guess, at least some of these wop loonies woke up to a shocking dose of reality that this worthless goal, is all but an unreachable one for Meds. The wops heading for suicide, as the one we have here, are the ones who can't seem to come to terms with this unattainable goal!

---

And the Nordics will always be able to use studies like Wetton's to keep foolish Med's begging at the doorway of honorary white purity - something that does not exist, except in the minds of brainwashed Meds, and that has no value, except the value that they give it.

This is what BestofSicily.com has figured out.

posted 26 August 2005 07:24 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Babbling Ape:
This is correct, as racial typologies such as caucaZoid and negroid are outdated, non scientific and irrelevant as applied to Somali or any other people.

---

Of course racial classifications are still valid. The Babbling Ape's source is "thefreedictionary.com". Geneticists like Passarino, Comas, Spurdle, Jenkins and Cavalli-Sforza all accept and use racial terminology, as do anthropologists like Howells and Groves. And there are thousands of recent studies at PubMed that analyze human races as well.

Here's a more credible source that reveals the non-PC, scientific consensus on the issue of race:

"To classify humans on the basis of physiological traits is difficult, for the coexistence of races through conquests, invasions, migrations, and mass deportations has produced a heterogeneous world population. Nevertheless, by limiting the criteria to such traits as skin pigmentation, color and form of hair, shape of head, stature, and form of nose, most anthropologists agree on the existence of three relatively distinct groups: the Caucasoid, the Mongoloid, and the Negroid."

-- The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2001.

quote:

---

* Neolithic migrant farmers from East Africa, represented by haplotype E3b

---

Neolithic farmers did not come from East Africa, you thieving nigger savage. They were Caucasoids from the Northern Levant:

quote:

---

EE should probably be on suicide watch right about now.

---

No, Afronuts should. Their all-consuming agenda to "taint" the people they envy with Negro blood and commandeer Caucasoid civilizations is born of deeply rooted self-hatred:

posted 26 August 2005 07:32 AM            

quote:

---

Southeastern Europeans are a mix of Paleolithic hunter-gatherers and Neolithic agriculturalists -- both Caucasoid and both "dark" from adaptating to the Mediterranean climate.

Of course, the high frequency of E3a in Wetton's sample comes from intermarriage with Afro-Caribbeans within the U.K., as that haplogroup has never been detected in Greece or Sicily.

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:

---

WETTON:

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

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

PROOF:

~80% E3b + Caucasoid mtDNA =

~80% E3b + Negroid mtDNA =

~95% R1b/I + European mtDNA =

R.I.P.

---

quote:

---

E3b and J cause East Africans to cluster closer to groups like Mediterranean Europeans than they do to Sub-Saharan Africans:

Mediterranean Europeans always cluster with non-Mediterranean Europeans:

And of course, these genetic relationships manifest themselves craniometrically as well:

[ #4 = English; #7 = Greek; #10 = Swiss ]

R.I.P.

---

posted 26 August 2005 09:37 AM            

Let's get back on Topic: Can anyone analyze this study?

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
That is exactly the case. The study sorts into precisely 6 distinct ethnic appearance {EA} groups.

Ea1 [pale Europeans] is essentially native European and described as homogeneous in appearance as well as genetic lineage.

Ea2 [dark Europeans] is a combination of European, African and West Asian and so described as heterogeneous.

Heterogeneous means Consisting of dissimilar elements or parts.

In this case heterogeneous means that EA2 has substantial paternity from the lineages that define group Ea3 [Afro-Caribbean] and Ea6 [Mid-Eastern].

Simplifying, Wetton is saying that pale whites of Northern Europe and dark whites of the medit are not only two different looking EA or ethnic appearance groups, but that they have two very different ancestries, one overwhelmingly European - the other European, African and West Asian.

You can call these two different groups "Aryans" if it makes you feel better -I believe facist Mussolini was the 1st to white-wash medit. diversity by declaring that Italians were 'Aryan', but it simply has no bearing on the actual ethnic appearance and genetic distinctiveness related by Wetton.

Frankly, there is nothing in this study that we did not know, before it was conducted, just some things that are denied and were again revealed [par for the course], such as E3a from West Africa showing up in Medits, yet again.

As with L lineages [over 11% in parts of Portugal], Dienekes and co. keep denying it, only to have it turn up again, in study after study.

---

posted 26 August 2005 01:39 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
The apes continue to babble -- trying to convince themselves and each other that they've won -- but still they provide no satisfactory answers:

What's taking so long?

---

I have a couple of questions for anyone regarding the data being provided.

First of, it is really insane and stupid to keep trying to assert the mtDNA is Negroid or Caucasoid considering you have been informed time and time again to the contrary. How the hell does mitochondria have racial traits?

But irregardless of this incessant foolishness, lets talk about the clustering information you provided. Is the genetic clustering based on mtDNA or what? If it is then it is completely irrelevant information.

posted 26 August 2005 02:02 PM            

quote:

---

ginney pussy:
-- trying to convince themselves and each other that they've won -- but still they provide no satisfactory answers

---

Frantic mulatto spook, of course the answers aren’t meant to make you feel good; that wasn’t their purpose. Their point is that they reflect reality.
As far as winning is concerned, it occurred the moment you initiated the ‘racial purity’ drivel; thereafter, it was all down under wop whining, not to mention the fantastic ‘male sex’ chromosome female carriers…a sure sign that we have an illiterate on our hands. Every wop farce has been soundly exposed. Face it, suicidal mulatto ho, the only reason you are responded to, is that, you make a perfect wop punching bag; otherwise you are a worthless illiterate, who doesn’t deserve attention, as the likes of bestofsicily have instantly recognized.

quote:

---

ginney pussy
What's taking so long?

---

The answer: It is that barren wop head of yours. On the other hand, your no-answers for the questions in…

quote:

---

As Richards et al demonstrated, the presence of recent sub-Saharan Hg E and Asian Hg J in dark skin outlier Meds, pulls them away from the REAL Europeans, and puts them in b/n the Near Easterners (who carry the same sub-Saharan and Asian lineages amongst others) and the REAL Europeans. But varying frequencies of Hg R and Hg N3 in outlier dark skin Meds, keeps them in the middle.

So now that every single wop straw has been squashed swiftly and concisely, emotionally fragile ginney retard, how about answers for the following:

• What haplotypes are considered “Niger Congo” mtDNA in the Ethiopian gene pool? Where is the Borana sample that Passarino et al, 1998, studied? And what does “Niger Congo” lineages have to do with the Borana?

• The E3b1 lineages in East African populations, with highest found in Cushitic speakers like the Borana, are indigenous sub-Sahara tropical African lineages. How does admixture or gene flow into east Africa, disqualify this fact any way?

• Recent E3b lineages in southern Europe, including E3a and HBS are all sub-Saharan. These people are genetically closer to sub-Saharan Africans, than the non-outlier Europeans carrying Hg R1b and Hg I in high frequencies. Where does Sanchez et al., 2005, state that E3b is genetically closer to Eurasian J and K, more than its sister PN2 E3a?
  

---

…is vindication of a finished business!

Chattering wop corpse, it’s time lay still in your grave.

posted 26 August 2005 02:23 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by osirion:
First of, it is really insane and stupid to keep trying to assert the mtDNA is Negroid or Caucasoid considering you have been informed time and time again to the contrary

---

Correct. Which is why geneticists don't assert any such foolishness.

Races really have no meaning biologically, certainly not genetically. - Spencer Wells.

Erroneous merely provides an example of someone who is stupid, and attempting to convince other people to be as stupid as he is. He is looking for a sucker, and in one year on Egyptsearch the only one he has found - is himself. Pretty pathetic.

posted 26 August 2005 03:48 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by osirion:

I have a couple of questions for anyone regarding the data being provided...

But irregardless of this incessant foolishness, lets talk about the clustering information you provided. Is the genetic clustering based on mtDNA or what? If it is then it is completely irrelevant information.

---

To put it simply:

If the map is Y-chromosome affiliated, varying frequencies of Hg R and Hg I in Mediterranean Europeans keeps them clustered near the Europeans carrying high frequencies of these lineages. However, **if we include other non-European lineages in the mix**, the relatively more frequent Hg E and Hg J in the Meds, pulls them away from the latter Europeans, as per Richards et al.

If we are dealing with autosomes, again, it is understandable that Meds would cluster with other Europeans, because of close proximity and obvious inter-gene flow between different migrating Europeans.

East Africans on the other hand, don't carry much E3a, and so, cluster away from other sub-Saharan Africans carrying these lineages. They are therefore bound to cluster closer to populations carrying E3b lineages, which have their origins in sub-Saharan East Africa. High frequencies of E3b, is enough to keep them in between E3a carrying sub-Saharan Africans and near Eastern populations carrying varying frequencies of E3b, and high frequencies of J and K lineages, or BR*(xE) in this case, as Sanchez et al. demonstrates. To a lesser extent, varying frequencies of Asian J and K lineages tends to pull East Africans to Eurasians, but again, due to the effect of the much higher E3b, they tend to maintain their distance and stay in the middle. If you notice in Sanchez et al. map, the Amhara which carry a relatively higher Eurasian input, are closer to the Asian populations, while the Oromo and the Somali, who have less, are further away from them. On the other hand, from the Asian groups, you have the Omani cluster closer to Africans, because of higher frequencies of sub-Saharan lineages. In the Sanchez et al. map, since we are dealing with multiple Y lineages, the different frequencies of these lineages play on the positioning of sampled groups with respect to one another.

"Thus, the first principal component (axis 1) explained 52.8% of the total variance, mainly due to the differencies in the frequencies in clade E and clade BR*(xE). The second component (axis 2) explained 26.6% of the total variance, mainly due to the differences in the frequencies of the E3a and E3b lineages." - Sanchez et al.2005

For the Sanchez et al map, click here and for the corresponding Y lineage frequencies, click here.

And of course top Topdog touched the heart of the matter, earlier, when he said:

quote:

---

…this [Sanchez et al map] below focuses specifically of E3b lineages…Look where Eurasians like Omanis, Iraqis, and Turks cluster and look where East Africans cluster you idiot, there is a difference. If E3b makes East Africans more Eurasian, why are both sub-Saharan East Africans and sub-Saharan west and central Africans so far away from Europeans and West Asians? Still think E3b makes East Africans more Eurasian? Look at this chart of haplogroup frequencies from the same study.

If E3b makes East Africans more Eurasian why do Eurasians and Europeans have lower frequencies of E3b lineages? Using this information the *OPPOSITE* can be stated, not your stupidity. The higher the frequency of E3b1 the more East African the population becomes; the lesser the E3b1 the lesser East African one becomes, its as plain and simple as that you dummy.

---

Here is a good discussion that touches on “relating” distances between haplogroups, in terms of genetic closeness, as well as frequencies in samples: http://phpbb-host.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=342&mforum=thenile

posted 26 August 2005 05:46 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
Correct. Which is why geneticists don't assert any such foolishness.

Races really have no meaning biologically, certainly not genetically. - Spencer Wells.

Erroneous merely provides an example of someone who is stupid, and attempting to convince other people to be as stupid as he is. He is looking for a sucker, and in one year on Egyptsearch the only one he has found - is himself. Pretty pathetic.

---

I am not going as far as saying that races do not exist. However, Mitochondria have nothing to do with it.

What I would like to see you Afrocentrics do is show genetic graphs that prove your point. I understand that E3b is closer related to E3a than to R1*, why don't you guys show this and present a graph that clusters Somalians closer to Tutsi and Mesai, etc? Just for the idiots that need pretty pictures and think that its a replacement for reading research.

Just don't get it...if you are 80% E3b then you should cluster closer to someone that is E3a genetically on the Y - chromosome side irregardless of phenotype - PERIOD. RIP!

Good GRIEF - it is not rocket science here people!

posted 26 August 2005 06:30 PM            

quote:

---

I am not going as far as saying that races do not exist. However, Mitochondria have nothing to do with it.

---

Then you concur with Wells as I do that race does not exist genetically.

Do you have non DNA based biological evidence to the contrary?

quote:

---

Originally posted by osirion:

What I would like to see you Afrocentrics do is show genetic graphs that prove your point.

---

The cheap shot is noted, but Afrocentrism is irrelevant.

Do you consider Spencer Wells and Afrocentric?

If not then you can't dispute Wells by attacking 'afrocentrism' can you?

Either you can refute the biology or not.

quote:

---

I understand that E3b is closer related to E3a than to R1*, why don't you guys show this and present a graph that clusters Somalians closer to Tutsi and Mesai, etc?

---

Sanchez Y chromosome plot....

quote:

---

Relatedness by Y chromosome per Sanchez plot with Oromo as baseline:

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

---

Can you read the above graph? What don't you understand about it?

quote:

---

Just don't get it...if you are 80% E3b then you should cluster closer to someone that is E3a genetically on the Y - chromosome side irregardless of phenotype - PERIOD.

---

By definition, yes. That's exactly what the Sanchez map shows.

quote:

---

Good GRIEF - it is not rocket science here people!

---

Then why are you making it harder than it has to be?

If you can read Sanchez graph then the matter is settled.

We know Erroneous can't because he is an idiot, but what's stopping you?

posted 26 August 2005 11:42 PM            

The Y-chromosome map clearly shows that our Somalians are much closer to Central African (Niger-Congo) types than the Western European types (that have little to no admixture).

End of discussion on a point that is plain to see.

As for the issue of race. Sex chromosomes and mitochondria DNA cannot tell us phenotype for obvious reasons but it can tell us relatedness (which is usually what race is suppose to be about).

posted 27 August 2005 01:50 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by osirion:
The point is that you guys need to use such graphs to represent your points to counter the distorters.

---

But not fake graphs and distortion as EuroDummy and Dienekes resort to.

Don't underestimate the intelligence of others.

Consider:

You yourself noted that the few legitimate graphs presented by dumb Euro flatly contradicted him.

He presented a skull chart from Brace showing the similarity of modern Sub saharan African crania to those of Melanesians and Australians - people whose ancestors migrated out of East Africa 50 thousand years ago.

As you correctly noted: This merely emphasized the Tropical African physiogomy of early Eurasians, who spread from East Africa right around the the world in the Paleolithic, as noted by Stringer, Holliday, Rogers, Trinkhous and many others.

EuroDummy presented a genetic distance map showing close clustering of Ethiopians [labeled East Africans], Nilo Saharans and Bantu, while showing Algerian Berber as the "intermediate" between Black Africans and Europeans.

This contradicted EuroDummy's claim that Ethiopians are the 'intermediates'.

Realising his mistake - EuroDummy tried to present another genetic distance graph, but the next graph showed only Africans to begin with, with no Europeans or Asians, and so failed to 'cancel' the previous graph and close clustering of Black Africans.

EuroDummy continues to present a graph used to argue that Lemba Bantu 'group with caucaZoids'. Actually the graph shows Lemba Bantu of South Africa as closer to the Greeks than the Ethiopians are.

But when EuroDummy is made to confront the physical appearance of the Lemba, he recants, and begins his futile spinning in circles act -

while babbling on about "Priestly Lemba" [the idiot keeps confusing the Lemba with the MidEast Jews],

while denying ever claiming that the Lemba grouped with 'caucaZoids' to begin with.

This just reveals his complete lack of knowledge of the Lemba of South Africa, as well as total ignorance of genetics, and the distinction between lineage and morphology.

Dumb Euro showed pictures of Filipino women from Best of Asia website and claimed to have documented the fact that they carried male only Y chromosome.

Once again, genetics took a holiday as Euromonkey makes up his nonsense as he goes along.

Just as he spins in circles with and endless series of incredibly stupid claims.

His spamming of graphs is self defeating, underscoring his ignorance, confusion and incoherence.

He has been universally 'dissed' on Egyptsearch and rightly so.

Dumb Euro is a shrill shrieking monkey, and obviously requries an audience as dumb as he is. We don't need to sink down to his level.

posted 27 August 2005 08:05 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by osirion:
lets talk about the clustering information you provided.

---

Yes, let's, because you certainly aren't going to get correct interpretations by listening to the Afro-apes, who only want to discredit the maps by calling them "fake" or claiming that the data represented is "contradictory" (you can see their desperation).

• This is a craniometric plot which shows five very important things: 1) Neolithic Greeks were Caucasoid; 2) Ancient Egyptians were Caucasoid; 3) North Africans are Caucasoid; 4) East Africans are intermediate between Caucasoids and Negroids; and 5) Negroids and Australoids are similarly adapted to tropical environments.

  

  
  

• This is a Y-chromosome plot which shows Northeast Africans clustering closer to Eurasians than to Sub-Saharan Africans. It also shows the Lemba, who've been identified as having ~10-50% paternal Caucasoid admixture, in an intermediate position.

  

  
  

• This is another Y-chromosome plot which doesn't include any Africans, but is important because it highlights the clustering of Greeks, Italians and Spaniards with other Europeans, as well as separate from Near Easterners.

  

  
  

• This is an autosomal DNA plot representing total ancestry. As expected, East Africans cluster closer to Sub-Saharan Africans, though they remain outliers due to their Caucasoid paternal ancestry. The San too are outliers because they're a mix of non-Negroid Khoisanids and Bantus. Berbers are somewhat intermediate, which isn't surprising given that they extend deep into the Sahara with maternal black admixture as high as 50% in some areas. Greeks and Italians, of course, cluster entirely with other Europeans.

  

  
  

• Finally, this is a very specialized Y-chromosome plot intended to highlight the differences between three populations identified in the study: Eurasians, East Africans and Sub-Saharan Africans. The study's conclusion is that Somalis (~80% E3b) are basically unrelated to E3a-carrying groups. Accordingly, they appear in a separate cluster from Sub-Saharan Africans.

  

The babbling apes have no answers for any of this, which is why all they can do is cry foul...to keep from simply crying and drowning in their tears.

posted 27 August 2005 08:25 AM            

lol@his monkey antics.

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
That is exactly the case. The study sorts into precisely 6 distinct ethnic appearance {EA} groups.

Ea1 [pale Europeans] is essentially native European and described as homogeneous in appearance as well as genetic lineage.

Ea2 [dark Europeans] is a combination of European, African and West Asian and so described as heterogeneous.

Heterogeneous means Consisting of dissimilar elements or parts.

In this case heterogeneous means that EA2 has substantial paternity from the lineages that define group Ea3 [Afro-Caribbean] and Ea6 [Mid-Eastern].

Simplifying, Wetton is saying that pale whites of Northern Europe and dark whites of the medit are not only two different looking EA or ethnic appearance groups, but that they have two very different ancestries, one overwhelmingly European - the other European, African and West Asian.

You can call these two different groups "Aryans" if it makes you feel better -I believe facist Mussolini was the 1st to white-wash medit. diversity by declaring that Italians were 'Aryan', but it simply has no bearing on the actual ethnic appearance and genetic distinctiveness related by Wetton.

---

posted 27 August 2005 10:24 AM            

quote:

---

rasol:

Osirion, notice dumb Euro, the screeching Albino monkey continues to spam off the topic of the study in question, while contradicting himself with 'his own' graphs.
lol@his monkey antics.

---

anti-human wop ho, is like a well read book; no surprise in the barrenness of that 'vestigial' vessel that it calls a head, which is an obvious impediment in ginney wuss’s comprehension of its own references of graphs and a number of studies that underwent a transparently crude wop defacement, every one of which, have already been appropriately dealt with here.

The last thing one should ask for, is a savage mulatto wimp, who can’t identify which set of sex chromosomes is indicative of a female or a male, to interpret more sophisticated genetic language.

And of course, no amount of distraction from an illiterate ginney pussy troll, should be relevant to :

The pussy wop’s no-answers for the questions in…

quote:

---

As Richards et al demonstrated, the presence of recent sub-Saharan Hg E and Asian Hg J in dark skin outlier Meds, pulls them away from the REAL Europeans, and puts them in b/n the Near Easterners (who carry the same sub-Saharan and Asian lineages amongst others) and the REAL Europeans. But varying frequencies of Hg R and Hg N3 in outlier dark skin Meds, keeps them in the middle.

So now that every single wop straw has been squashed swiftly and concisely, emotionally fragile ginney retard, how about answers for the following:

• What haplotypes are considered “Niger Congo” mtDNA in the Ethiopian gene pool? Where is the Borana sample that Passarino et al, 1998, studied? And what does “Niger Congo” lineages have to do with the Borana?

• The E3b1 lineages in East African populations, with highest found in Cushitic speakers like the Borana, are indigenous sub-Sahara tropical African lineages. How does admixture or gene flow into east Africa, disqualify this fact any way?

• Recent E3b lineages in southern Europe, including E3a and HBS are all sub-Saharan. These people are genetically closer to sub-Saharan Africans, than the non-outlier Europeans carrying Hg R1b and Hg I in high frequencies. Where does Sanchez et al., 2005, state that E3b is genetically closer to Eurasian J and K, more than its sister PN2 E3a?
  

---

…is vindication of a finished business!

chattering wop corpse, it’s time to lay still in your grave.

posted 27 August 2005 10:52 AM            

Greek is not derived from Latin but is considered cognate with Latin: both being derived from Proto-Indo-European. It seems, however, that a very significant portion of the Greek language has words that cannot be attributed to the Indo-European language family. In the introduction of Volume I of Black Athena, Martin Bernal states: “I became convinced that anything up to a quarter of the Greek vocabulary could be traced to Semitic origins. This, together with 40-50 percent that seem to be Indo-European, still left a quarter to a third of the Greek vocabulary unexplained. … It was only in 1979, when I was glancing through a copy of Cerny’s Coptic Etymological Dictionary, that I was able to get some sense of late Ancient Egyptian. Almost immediately I realized that this was the third outside language.” Preface pg xiv.

posted 27 August 2005 12:10 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Calypso:
Quote Evil Euro:
In effect what he is saying above is that to link Neolithic farmers in Europe to East Africans is tantamount to stealing from the legacy of Caucasoids.

---

lol. He can spin for the rest of his life, and he will still end up trapped by the perverse paradox of his own racism...

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought:
This clearly demonstrates Evil E's inconsistances. This is why he refuses to define what he means when he uses the terms 'Caucasoid' and 'Negroid' and why he refuses to lay out a chronology for the above.

Either way Evil E has once again cornered himself. If the "primitive" Neolithic Greeks had 'Negroid' features as Angel clearly stated then they were not 'Caucasoid'

....or conversly 'Caucasoids' did not evolve until after the neolithic period and hence played no part in the establishment of 'civilization'.

---

posted 27 August 2005 01:01 PM            

"the perverse paradox of his own racism..."

posted 27 August 2005 04:47 PM            

Now, recall I said…

quote:

---

To put it simply:

If the map is Y-chromosome affiliated, varying frequencies of Hg R and Hg I in Mediterranean Europeans keeps them clustered near the Europeans carrying high frequencies of these lineages. However, **if we include other non-European lineages in the mix**, the relatively more frequent Hg E and Hg J in the Meds, pulls them away from the latter Europeans, as per Richards et al.

If we are dealing with autosomes, again, it is understandable that Meds would cluster with other Europeans, because of close proximity and obvious inter-gene flow between different migrating Europeans.

East Africans on the other hand, don't carry much E3a, and so, cluster away from other sub-Saharan Africans carrying these lineages. They are therefore bound to cluster closer to populations carrying E3b lineages, which have their origins in sub-Saharan East Africa. High frequencies of E3b, is enough to keep them in between E3a carrying sub-Saharan Africans and near Eastern populations carrying varying frequencies of E3b, and high frequencies of J and K lineages, or BR*(xE) in this case, as Sanchez et al. demonstrates. To a lesser extent, varying frequencies of Asian J and K lineages tends to pull East Africans to Eurasians, but again, due to the effect of the much higher E3b, they tend to maintain their distance and stay in the middle. If you notice in Sanchez et al. map, the Amhara which carry a relatively higher Eurasian input, are closer to the Asian populations, while the Oromo and the Somali, who have less, are further away from them. On the other hand, from the Asian groups, you have the Omani cluster closer to Africans, because of higher frequencies of sub-Saharan lineages. In the Sanchez et al. map, since we are dealing with multiple Y lineages, the different frequencies of these lineages play on the positioning of sampled groups with respect to one another.

---

And now, what the spooky wop said:

quote:

---

Finally, this is a very specialized Y-chromosome plot intended to highlight the differences between three populations identified in the study: Eurasians, East Africans and Sub-Saharan Africans. The study's conclusion is that Somalis (~80% E3b) are basically unrelated to E3a-carrying groups. Accordingly, they appear in a separate cluster from Sub-Saharan Africans.

---

***And now what Sanchez et al. exactly state about their Y haplogroup plot***:

• “Figure 2 [the Y haplogroup plot already presented above] shows a principal component analysis of the haplogroups. We observed a similar pattern in neighbour joining, unrooted tree (data not shown). The two principal components accounted for 79.4% of the genetic variance observed mainly due to the differences in the frequencies of clade E and clade BR*(xE) (first component) and E3a and E3b lineages (second component).

• The first component separated the non-Africans and sub-Saharan west Africans characterized by high frequencies of the clade E3a (Figure 2, Axis 1).

• The North and East Africans were separated from the rest of the sub-Saharan populations (Figure 2, axis 2) mainly by the different frequencies of haplogroup E3b1.

• The position of the **Ethiopian Oromos was close to that of the Somalis** due to the relatively high frequencies of the haplogroup E3b*(xE3b1) and E3b1.

• The **Ethiopian Amharas** and the Egyptian population **were positioned between the African and the non-African populations, primarily due to the high frequencies of the clade BR*(xE).”
  

So, as we can see, the E3b by no means, makes these Africans “Eurasian”; in fact, it is the reason that East Africans maintain their distance from both predominantly E3a-carrying populations and Eurasians. Again, we are informed about the significant difference between Amharas and Oromos, with Amharas being pulled relatively closer to Eurasians due to more foreign input in their gene pool than the Oromos. There you have it; the double edged sword!

Last but not least:

Now, that another specific quote has exposed another wop farce [the trend],

I’d like the pussy wop to give us a quote from the study, that states that "Somalis (~80% E3b) are basically unrelated to E3a-carrying groups"!
It is certainly not from the above Sanchez et al. quote, explaining the Y haplogroup plot; then, from where?

Notice that a related question, remains amoung the "unanswered set of questions" I asked earlier:

quote:

---

• Recent E3b lineages in southern Europe, including E3a and HBS are all sub-Saharan. These people are genetically closer to sub-Saharan Africans, than the non-outlier Europeans carrying Hg R1b and Hg I in high frequencies. **Where does Sanchez et al., 2005, state that E3b is genetically closer to Eurasian J and K, more than its sister PN2 E3a?**

---

posted 27 August 2005 05:25 PM            

quote:

---

ginney pussy:
Finally, this is a very specialized Y-chromosome plot intended to highlight the differences between three populations identified in the study: Eurasians, East Africans and Sub-Saharan Africans...

---

Suicide watch: spooky wop’s insecurity is reaching a breaking point, but if holding onto wop myths means delaying suicide, then hey so be it, but for those of us in the real world, this…

"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

“…East Africans were separated from **the rest of ** the sub-Saharan populations (Figure 2, axis 2) mainly by the different frequencies of haplogroup E3b1.” - Sanchez et al.

…is just a given. It would seem as though Sanchez et al had to interpret this in a number of ways, in anticipation for very dense people, but not to the extent exhibited by a fragile emotional mulatto!

posted 27 August 2005 10:52 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Calypso:
Not only would the specific citation be necessary but perhaps an explanation of the mechanism of relatedness.

---

For ginney, known for his no reading skills, it would be **absolutely** necessary, to provide the **exact** citation!

quote:

---

Calypso:
How he proposes to explain a “closer” relationship between lines that don’t share a common ancestor is something I think we’re all sitting at the edge of our seats waiting to hear.

---

You might want to braise yourself for quite a **long wait**; I had asked him to do so for some time now, and all we ever got back, were immaterial maps showing populations which carry varying frequencies of sub-Saharan E3b lineages amongst others, making them cluster close to indigenous E3b carrying North and sub-Saharans Africans.

quote:

---

Calypso:
Ultimately he resorts to a dishonest sleight of hand by claiming that E3b relates to J and K because it is Caucasian “affiliated” like they are; meaning that it’s carriers, in a fashion similar to European J and K carriers, became Caucasian through adaptation to the climate of North East Africa: We know how brutally cold it was – no vitamin D deficient Darkie could survive it without morphing into a Caucasian!

---

You can use the keyword 'dishonest' again. This is further exacerbated by his lack of reading skills, common sense and basic geography. He would have to "make up" or "fabricate" Africa's climate history to be that extremely cold, much less evidence of "cold-adapted" prehistoric Africans. But then, ginney has already thought of Y chromosome-carrying females ; so, who's to say that any fantastic claim is beyond him!

posted 28 August 2005 05:01 AM            

quote:

---

This is a Y-chromosome plot which shows Northeast Africans clustering closer to Eurasians than to Sub-Saharan Africans. It also shows the Lemba, who've been identified as having ~10-50% paternal Caucasoid admixture, in an intermediate position.

---

Which isn't surprising given that the Ethiopians are pooled together as one in that graph and combined they have higher levels of J which of course groups them closer Eurasians, but E3b does *NOT* group them closer Eurasians. No one has ever denied that haplogroup J would group some groups closer to Eurasians since J is a Eurasian haplogroup, the dispute is whether E3b draws them closer to Eurasians and it doesn't. Spare us the rest of your distortions.

" The study's conclusion is that Somalis (~80% E3b) are basically unrelated to E3a-carrying groups. Accordingly, they appear in a separate cluster from Sub-Saharan Africans."

They appear in a separate cluster away from Eurasians which destroys the your stupidity that E3b makes East Africans more Eurasian and less African, Sanchez et tal has never stated that E3b is Eurasian. j haplogroups make certain East African groups more Eurasian than others with Amharas having the highest frequencies and Oromos and Somalis having the lowest frequencies, a point that has been made in other studies[Semino et tal, Crucianai et tal, Kivilsid et tal and now Sanchez et tal] and confirmed here once again. Good look trying to make E3b Eurasian or Caucasoid, you've failed miserably despite referencing studies that clearly prove you wrong. Idiot.