EgyptSearch Forums: Post A Reply

...

»	EgyptSearch Forums » Deshret » West Eurasian admixture in Eurafricans » Post A Reply

T O P I C R E V I E W
Perahu Member # 18548	posted 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):
adrianne Member # 10761	posted this just proves alot of modern egyptians ethiopians etc etc have mixed dna. since they have been invaded throughout their history. before they were invaded they look like this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Huni-StatueHead_BrooklynMuseum.png you cant refute this
Perahu Member # 18548	posted The modern and ancient populations of those places are practically identical. They are very closely located to Eurasia, one should not expect them to be purely African.
adrianne Member # 10761	posted 3rd dynasty RULER Q.why did the EARLY rulers look like this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Huni-StatueHead_BrooklynMuseum.png A.?
Calabooz' Member # 18238	posted 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.
The Gaul Member # 16198	posted 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.
Perahu Member # 18548	posted 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. Genome-wide structure of Jews (Behar et al. 2010) Review of study by Dienekes
Calabooz' Member # 18238	posted 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. 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
Perahu Member # 18548	posted 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). There's a strong West Eurasian component in Hamitic Eurafricans (between ~85% to ~50%).
Calabooz' Member # 18238	posted 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
Perahu Member # 18548	posted 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.
Perahu Member # 18548	posted 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!
Calabooz' Member # 18238	posted 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...
Perahu Member # 18548	posted 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.
Calabooz' Member # 18238	posted 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?
Perahu Member # 18548	posted 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.
Djehuti Member # 6698	posted ^ 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
Perahu Member # 18548	posted 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.
Calabooz' Member # 18238	posted 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.?
Perahu Member # 18548	posted 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.
Calabooz' Member # 18238	posted 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
.Charlie Bass. Member # 10328	posted 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. Genome-wide structure of Jews (Behar et al. 2010) Review of study by Dienekes 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!
.Charlie Bass. Member # 10328	posted 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? http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v466/n7303/extref/nature09103-s1.pdf Read supplementary note 3 in that PDF you monkeytard and tell me how it relates to your stupidity.
Perahu Member # 18548	posted 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.
.Charlie Bass. Member # 10328	posted 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.
Perahu Member # 18548	posted You are unable to think for yourself.
alTakruri Member # 10195	posted 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.
.Charlie Bass. Member # 10328	posted 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.
Sundjata Member # 13096	posted ^lol
Perahu Member # 18548	posted 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.
.Charlie Bass. Member # 10328	posted 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.
Djehuti Member # 6698	posted ^ 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.
Perahu Member # 18548	posted 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.
.Charlie Bass. Member # 10328	posted 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.
Perahu Member # 18548	posted 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.
Calabooz' Member # 18238	posted ^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
Perahu Member # 18548	posted 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).
Perahu Member # 18548	posted Eurasian mtDNA in Ethiopians
Calabooz' Member # 18238	posted ^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
the lioness Member # 17353	posted 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
.Charlie Bass. Member # 10328	posted 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.
Perahu Member # 18548	posted quote: Originally posted by .Charlie Bass.: And Europeans are intermediate between Africans and Asians but closer to Africans Negrocentric liar. ---- Reich et al. 2010
Calabooz' Member # 18238	posted ^The divergences in that figure are caused by sequencing error. Read it again
Perahu Member # 18548	posted 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.
Calabooz' Member # 18238	posted ^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...