...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Deshret
»
KEITA AN AFROCentric fraud
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Gynphobic: [QB] I dare you to find me one statement in the 2003 Hanihara et. al. study which indicates that Egyptians cluster more with sub-Saharan Negroids than Europeans/Middle Easterners. As far as I'm concerned, even Hanihara et. al. (2003) admits that sub-Saharan African populations are biologically distinct from all other populations including Egyptians: Applying the neighbor-joining method to the MMD distances results in the dendrogram illustrated in Figure 3. The initial split, suggesting the greatest dissimilarity, is between Subsaharan Africans and the rest of the world. The Europeans, North Africans, and South Asians are then separated from the remaining groups. Oceania and the Southeast Asian groups form a separate branch that is separated from a large grouping of Central and East/Northeast Asian, Arctic, and New World series clusters. And by the way, Nubians aren't a Negroid population. According to the 2005 study of Brace et. al., Somalis are a non-Negroid population. Nigger, you need to work on your reading comprehension skills. The Egyptians are a Mediterranean population of non-Negroid origin According to a recent study by Arredi et. al. (2004), in Table A1 of that study entitled SNP Haplogroup Frequencies in the Five North African Population Samples and Other Published Samples, has determined that out of 26 sub-Saharan Negroid lineages, not a single one was present in either the Upper Egyptian or Lower Egyptian population samples, except for Hg A3b2* which was found in one individual from the Lower Egyptian sample. [IMG]http://es.geocities.com/luis_aldamiz/Genetics/images/Arredi1.jpg[/IMG] This phylogeny of Y-chromosomal haplogroups (fig. 1B of the 2004 study) clearly demonstrates that the researchers Arredi et. al. did not uncover any sub-Saharan Negroid lineages in either Northern or Southern Egypt, with the exception of Hg A3b2*. Note that the Egyptian population is genetically distinct from the populations of sub-Saharan Africa but very similar to those of other North Africans, meaning that they are of full Eastern Mediterranean Caucasoid origin. The authors of the study write that North Africans (including Egyptians) are largely genetically distinct from both Europeans and sub-Saharan Negroids. According to Arredi et. al. in the study A Predominantly Neolithic Origin for Y-Chromosomal DNA Variation in North Africa (2004): First, as shown in fig. 1B, the lineages that are most prevalent in North Africa are distinct from those in the regions to the immediate north and south: Europe and sub-Saharan Africa. This is illustrated by even a cursory examination of the commonest haplogroups: E3b2 is the most common haplogroup in North Africa, forming 42% of the combined sample. In contrast, R1b made up 55% of a mixed European sample (Underhill et al. 2000) and was even higher (77%) in the Iberian sample examined by Bosch et al. (2001), whereas E3a predominates in many sub-Saharan areas, being present at 64% in a pooled sample (Underhill et al. 2000; Cruciani et al. 2002). Such a finding is not surprising, in the light of the earlier genetic studies, but has an important implication: despite haplogroups shared at low frequency, suggesting limited gene flow, North African populations have a genetic history largely distinct from both Europe and sub-Saharan Africa over the timescales needed for the Y-chromosomal differentiation to develop. [QUOTE] [i]http://i204.photobucket.com/albums/bb178/beyoku/F3small.jpg[/i] [IMG]http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w164/MysticNinjaJay/figure7ancientegyptianbodyplan.jpg[/IMG] [/QUOTE]Actually, according to those graphs Egyptians cluster the closest with Tasmanians. Does that mean that Egyptians are Tasmanians now? Not to mention the fact that none of the populations that Egyptians cluster the closest with, such as other North Africans or European Mediterraneans, are even mentioned or included on those graphs! [QUOTE] The only fraud is you and your own quote kills your claim. Your "hair" argument is warmed over bullshiit from Madilda, using E. Stouhal's long defunct early 1970s approach. Is this all you got? In his writing, Keita referred to how certain scholars never develop a "true white" stereotypical model as they do with blacks. If they did, then all hair not meeting a long, straight caucasoid "true" type would be "Negro." But in any event your "point" and that of tired Madilda is bogus, and revealed by your own quote. Note Keita says that "most of these were interpreted as being hybrids." He never claims Stouhal said they were "pure negro" this is something added on by madilda and you to create a bogus "talking point." And if Strouhal's says they were "mixed Negroid-Europid" origin, then that makes them non-white. Either way, they aren't white. In fact, Strouhal points out the long standing African elements not only physically but culturally as well- i.e. the rainmaker. Ironically, Strohal takes pains to point out how the Badarian are linked to african groups, such as in the Sudan. Keita in 2005 put this to the test, making a head to head comparison with whites, blacks and the Badari. Results showed the Badari link much more closely with Africans than white groups, confirming more scientifically, with a bigger sample, the close links noted by Strouhal. Both Strouhal and Keita agree that they had close links to Africans. QUOTE: "An examination of the distance hierarchies reveals the Badarian series to be more similar to the Teita in both analyses and always more similar to all of the African series than to the Norse and Berg groups (see Tables 3A & 3B and Figure 2). Essentially equal similarity is found with the Zalavar and Dogon series in the 11-variable analysis and with these and the Bushman in the one using 15 variables. The Badarian series clusters with the tropical African groups no matter which algorithm is employed (see Figures 3 and 4).. In none of them did the Badarian sample affiliate with the European series."(S.O.Y. Keita. Early Nile Valley Farmers from El-Badari: Aboriginals or "European" Agro-Nostratic Immigrants? Craniometric Affinities Considered With Other Data. Journal of Black Studies, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 191-208 (2005) [/QUOTE]None of this proves that Strouhal said that >80% of Badarian hair is of Negroid origin. Nigger, you conveniently avoided answering my questions: Can you find me a single passage in Strouhal's 1971 report in which he concludes that >80% of Badarian hair is Negroid? This is obviously a gross distortion on Keita's part, especially after Strouhal concluded that less than 6-8% of the Badarian crania were determined as being of Negroid origin. If 6-8% of the Badarian crania were determined as being of Negroid origin, then how can >80% of Badarian hair be of Negroid origin, as Keita falsely maintains, especially given the fact that the Badarians were more Europoid than Negroid? [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3