Egyptians: ~83% West Eurasian, ~17% Sub-Saharan African Northwest Africans: ~77% West Eurasian, ~23% Sub-Saharan African Ethiopians: ~53% West Eurasian, ~45% Sub-Saharan African, ~2% South Asian
Per Behar et al. 2010
See image below (Red is Sub-Saharan African): Posted by adrianne (Member # 10761) on :
this just proves alot of modern egyptians ethiopians etc etc have mixed dna. since they have been invaded throughout their history.
First of all, what is the name of this study? Given your history of distorting and misinterpreting these things, you need to post a link to the article.
Posted by The Gaul (Member # 16198) on :
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': First of all, what is the name of this study? Given your history of distorting and misinterpreting these things, you need to post a link to the article.
Many of these studies make the mistake of treating Ethiopia as a monotonous block, a nation of 85 million people and multiple ethnic groups. Most of them are unaware of the very nations they claim to study. Wouldn't surprise me if it's direct quotes at all.
Posted by Perahu (Member # 18548) on :
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': First of all, what is the name of this study? Given your history of distorting and misinterpreting these things, you need to post a link to the article.
quote:Ethiopians: ~53% West Eurasian, ~45% Sub-Saharan African, ~2% South Asian
What the hell?
"To facilitate extraction of PCs capturing genetic variation specific to West Eurasia we excluded populations showing clear membership in **NON-West Eurasian** genetic components (Yemenites, Saudi Arabians, Ethiopian Jews, and Indian Jews)."
So explain to me where you got your 53% West Eurasian?
quote:Egyptians: ~83% West Eurasian, ~17% Sub-Saharan African Northwest Africans: ~77% West Eurasian, ~23% Sub-Saharan African
Again, I don't know where you're coming up with this:
"Populations of the Caucasus, flanked by Cypriots, form an almost uninterrupted rim that separates the bulk of Europeans from Middle Eastern populations. Bedouins, Jordanians, Palestinians and Saudi Arabians are located in close proximity to each other, which is consistent with a common origin in the Arabian Peninsula25, whereas the Egyptian, Moroccan, Mozabite Berber, and Yemenite samples are located **closer to sub-Saharan populations (Fig. 1a and Supplementary Fig. 2a).**"
"**The Bantu, rather than San/Pygmy specific signal (discernable at K=6) has similar prevalence among the Ethiopian Jews5, Semitic-speaking Tigreans and Amharas, but is slightly more frequent among the Cushitic-speaking Oromos** (Fig. 3 and Supplementary Fig. 4). Presence of **sub-Saharan specific component in Moroccans and Egyptians, extending to the near-by populations of the Near East and Arabia, is evident and consistent with a previous report for Algerian Mozabite Berbers, Bedouins, and Palestinians1**. The main differences between Europe and the Middle East are quantitative, rather than qualitative. At K=4, a correlation matrix reproduces the uniformity of West Eurasia, and the split into the Middle Eastern and European gene pools is evident at K=8 (Supplementary Fig. 5a). Note that Cyprus, assigned formally within Europe, coincides with Levantine, not European populations.
Please see the chart in the OP, extracted from the K=8 image.
Yes, certain North Africans and Middle Easterners have Sub-Saharan admixture, but it is not much (see Red Cluster in the OP image).
There's a strong West Eurasian component in Hamitic Eurafricans (between ~85% to ~50%). Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
quote:You must be colorblind.
Please see the chart in the OP, extracted from the K=8 image.
Yes, certain North Africans and Middle Easterners have Sub-Saharan admixture, but it is not much (see Red Cluster in the OP image).
Strong West Eurasian admixture in Hamitic Eurafricans (between ~85% to ~50%).
Just to say, Autosomal results are not as good for inferring ancient population structure because they are so unstable as opposed to uni-parental markers
Posted by Perahu (Member # 18548) on :
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': Perahu is simply in denial of the substantial African gene flow into West Eurasians and that they are a hybrid populations so he wants to make the same true for Africans as well
Not true.
Most African Negroids are 100% African, just look at the scores of the Mandenkas (arguably the most Northern authentic Negroids).
I only claimed Hamitic Eurafricans are heavily mixed.
Posted by Perahu (Member # 18548) on :
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': lol you dumbass. You claimed this:
quote:~83% West Eurasian, ~17% Sub-Saharan African
But as the authors from the full text, which I'm guessing you haven't even read, say, the Egyptian and Northwest Africans cluster CLOSER TO SUB-SAHARAN AFRICANS. Which is in stark contrast to the other groups so how can they be a majority west Eurasian if they are CLOSER to sub-Saharan Africans?
Seriously, what the **** is wrong with you.
They cluster closer to Africans compared to 100% Eurasians from West Asia like the Georgians and Turks. THIS DOES NOT MEAN THEY ARE CLOSER TO SUB-SAHARAN AFRICANS THAN TO WEST ASIANS DUMBFUCK.
I'm dealing with retards here, jeez!
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
quote:Seriously, what the **** is wrong with you.
They cluster closer to Africans compared to 100% Eurasians from West Asia like the Georgians and Turks. THIS DOES NOT MEAN THEY ARE CLOSER TO SUB-SAHARAN AFRICANS THAN TO WEST ASIANS DUMBFUCK.
I'm dealing with retards here, jeez!
Oh, they don't consider East Africa as sub-Saharan in this article...
Posted by Perahu (Member # 18548) on :
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': Just to say, Autosomal results are not as good for inferring ancient population structure because they are so unstable as opposed to uni-parental markers
***Weak***
VERY WEAK argument.
Uni-parental markers only represent <0.01% of someone's genetic make-up, IT DOES *NOT* CODE FOR PHENOTYPE. While Autosomal represents >99% of someone's genetic make-up, and DOES CODE FOR PHENOTYPE.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
quote:***Weak***
VERY WEAK argument.
? It's not even an argument, nor is it debatable.
On the other hand, if this indicated gene flow, would it not show up on mtDNA and yDNA results as well? Probably.
quote:Uni-parental markers only represent <0.01% of someone's genetic make-up, IT DOES *NOT* CODE FOR PHENOTYPE. While Autosomal represents >99% of someone's genetic make-up, and DOES CODE FOR PHENOTYPE.
Yes, we all know autosomes are correlated with phenotype. So, what's your point?
Posted by Perahu (Member # 18548) on :
mitochondrial and NRY data represent only an extremely small portion of the whole genome (<0.01%) and are particularly ***susceptible to the effects of genetic drift***. Autosomal DNA is far more useful in population genetics.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ This coming from the idiot who claims Bantu Tutsi and Hima and Nilo-Saharan Hema as "Eurasian mixed", as well as referring to Pontikos as "Doctor"! LMAO Posted by Perahu (Member # 18548) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ This coming from the idiot who claims Bantu Tutsi and Hima and Nilo-Saharan Hema as "Eurasian mixed", as well as referring to Pontikos as "Doctor"! LMAO
Notice that there are two Bantu samples from Kenya in my chart with roughly 10% West Eurasian DNA.
Most of the Bantu are pure though, so are the West Africans.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
quote:mitochondrial and NRY data represent only a small portion of the whole genome (<0.01%) and are particularly ***susceptible to the effects of genetic drift***.
Lol... of course. But we can still estimate how long a haplogroup has been in a region on intra-phylogenetic variation. Not to mention they are non-recombining. As mentioned when we discussed the Tishkoff article, the East African position is not the result of admixture but rather greater African vs. non-African diversity. On the other hand, if it were indicating gene flow, uni-parental markers would pick up on this too, don't ya think? In the case of East Africans, "Simple admixture models are less likely"
quote:Notice that there are two Bantu samples from Kenya in my chart with roughly 10% West Eurasian DNA.
Didn't Sundjata go over this with you in regards to Tishkoff et al.?
Posted by Perahu (Member # 18548) on :
The author (Behar) considers the blue and light green clusters to be West Eurasian.
Egyptians: ~83% West Eurasian Northwest Africans: ~77% West Eurasian Ethiopians: ~53% West Eurasian
Makes perfect sense.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
As stated by Tishkoff et al. the East African structure is ancestral. No point in going down that road again, I'm done.
PS. Sorry for the mistakes, been up the past 24hours 0_0
Posted by .Charlie Bass. (Member # 10328) on :
quote:Originally posted by Perahu:
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': First of all, what is the name of this study? Given your history of distorting and misinterpreting these things, you need to post a link to the article.
No, apparently you are a dumb ape that cannot understand studies, have you taken the time to read the supplemental data in that study? I don't have the full text at my hands right now, I'm at work, but it never makes the dumb claims that you made. Stupid monkeytard!
Posted by .Charlie Bass. (Member # 10328) on :
quote:Originally posted by Perahu: The author (Behar) considers the blue and light green clusters to be West Eurasian.
Egyptians: ~83% West Eurasian Northwest Africans: ~77% West Eurasian Ethiopians: ~53% West Eurasian
Makes perfect sense.
Where in the study does Behar makes those claims, please point out where ape?
Read supplementary note 3 in that PDF you monkeytard and tell me how it relates to your stupidity.
Posted by Perahu (Member # 18548) on :
quote:Originally posted by .Charlie Bass.: No, appraently you are a dumb ape that cannot understand studies, have you taken the time to read the supplemental data in that study? I don't have the full text at my hands right now, I'm at work, but it never makes the dumb claims that you made. Stupid monkeytard!
You know, you sound like you have Tourette's Syndrome.
Look at the West Eurasian clusters present in all the Eurafricans.
Posted by .Charlie Bass. (Member # 10328) on :
quote:Originally posted by Perahu:
quote:Originally posted by .Charlie Bass.: No, appraently you are a dumb ape that cannot understand studies, have you taken the time to read the supplemental data in that study? I don't have the full text at my hands right now, I'm at work, but it never makes the dumb claims that you made. Stupid monkeytard!
You know, you sound like you have Tourette's Syndrome.
Look at the West Eurasian clusters present in all the Eurafricans.
Monkey read the supplementary data before you speak. Your interpreatation of colors is retarded because the study makes no assumptions that you make, you simply parrots those apes from Dienekes blog and anthroscape who don't understand studies themselves.
Posted by Perahu (Member # 18548) on :
You are unable to think for yourself.
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
Behar relies on Dienekes to make the statements that he as a known professional geneticist with a car$$r at stake cannot forthrightly say for himself. I gather this from Behar going on record in Nature in praise of Dienekes.
Posted by .Charlie Bass. (Member # 10328) on :
quote:Originally posted by Perahu: You are unable to think for yourself.
Thats why you're parroting Dienekes and Racial Retardology and can't read for yourself, yeah right homo chimpus erectus apeus.
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
^lol
Posted by Perahu (Member # 18548) on :
quote:Originally posted by .Charlie Bass.:
quote:Originally posted by Perahu: You are unable to think for yourself.
Thats why you're parroting Dienekes and Racial Retardology and can't read for yourself, yeah right homo chimpus erectus apeus.
Charlie
You are nearly two times more African than the average Ethiopian. Posted by .Charlie Bass. (Member # 10328) on :
quote:Originally posted by Perahu:
quote:Originally posted by .Charlie Bass.:
quote:Originally posted by Perahu: You are unable to think for yourself.
Thats why you're parroting Dienekes and Racial Retardology and can't read for yourself, yeah right homo chimpus erectus apeus.
Charlie
You are nearly two times more African than the average Ethiopian.
You are nearly 100 times more ape than the average gorilla. Ethiopians are more "African" than I am because they are Africans you monkeytard.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Of course. When the very FACT that ancient Egyptians were indigenous Africans and thus related to other Africans cannot be denied, the next logical or rather illogical step would be to make other Africans "Eurasian caca-soids" as well. Thus peoples from Ethiopians and even Bantus become "Eurasian". It's funny, that Anglo-Pyramidiot and DaDumHo seem to be purposely ignoring this fact. I'm sure they see this idiocy that Paironuts writes but they purposely do not make the connection. Posted by Perahu (Member # 18548) on :
quote:Originally posted by .Charlie Bass.: You are nearly 100 times more ape than the average gorilla. Ethiopians are more "African" than I am because they are Africans you monkeytard.
You are biologically more African than them.
Posted by .Charlie Bass. (Member # 10328) on :
quote:Originally posted by Perahu:
quote:Originally posted by .Charlie Bass.: You are nearly 100 times more ape than the average gorilla. Ethiopians are more "African" than I am because they are Africans you monkeytard.
You are biologically more African than them.
Um no, they are Africans you ape, I am not, biologically they're connected to other Africans more than I am.
Posted by Perahu (Member # 18548) on :
quote:Originally posted by .Charlie Bass.: Um no, they are Africans you ape, I am not, biologically they're connected to other Africans more than I am.
Ethiopians are several times closer to pure North Europeans than you are. Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
^Sure, if that makes you feel better.
But the reality is that their shared cluster with West Eurasians is consistent with their OOA status and not due to admixture.
Question: Who came first, Africans or Western Eurasians?
Then we still have the fact of the substantial gene flow into West Eurasia from Africa
Posted by Perahu (Member # 18548) on :
Ethiopians have experienced admixture events with West Eurasians (maternally between 30% to 60% macrohaplogroup M and N and paternally between 15% to 50% macrohaplogroup F).
Posted by Perahu (Member # 18548) on :
Eurasian mtDNA in Ethiopians
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
^Source for image?
Also, it's debatable whether or not haplogroups M and N had Asian origins. What's your reference in regards to haplogroup F?
On the other hand, am I now allowed to say that African genes in Europeans make them part Negroid LOL!
Edited" Meant to say Asian not African
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by adrianne: [QB] 3rd dynasty RULER
Q.why did the EARLY rulers look like this
Somebody broke off his nose because when you break the nose off a statue it looks blacker. Probably broken off by Taharqa's men
Posted by .Charlie Bass. (Member # 10328) on :
quote:Originally posted by Perahu:
quote:Originally posted by .Charlie Bass.: Um no, they are Africans you ape, I am not, biologically they're connected to other Africans more than I am.
Ethiopians are several times closer to pure North Europeans than you are.
And Europeans are intermediate between Africans and Asians but closer to Africans, your point being monkey? Ethiopians are still biologically more African than African Americans.
Posted by Perahu (Member # 18548) on :
quote:Originally posted by .Charlie Bass.: And Europeans are intermediate between Africans and Asians but closer to Africans
^The divergences in that figure are caused by sequencing error. Read it again
Posted by Perahu (Member # 18548) on :
You don't even know what the f' you are talking about. Errors mainly concerned the ancient hominid samples (processed and aligned differently, despite this Papuans were still closest to the Denisova), it had little to no impact on the AMH samples.
Europeans are not closer to Africans according to the latest complete genome data.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
^Believe what you want. But you were refuted on the same study here along with the issue of divergence times. I'm just going to let this thread die now...
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
