|
Post by mike2 on Mar 27, 2005 3:26:27 GMT -5
*sigh* Whatever, TopDog. The classifications aren't going to change because you don't like them.
|
|
|
Post by topdog on Mar 27, 2005 6:34:03 GMT -5
*sigh* Whatever, TopDog. The classifications aren't going to change because you don't like them. Whatever. Veddoid mixture in East Africans and AEs is nonexistent and pure speculation. M1 is regarded as East African in most published studies, no study has ever meantioned M1 having anything to do with Veddoids.
|
|
|
Post by mike2 on Mar 27, 2005 7:37:33 GMT -5
Pfffft, you wish, sucka! "M1 - This haplogroup is probably not Negroid, despite what many say. Originally it was proposed an African origin, due to the presence of the subclade M1 in Eastern Africa. However, a posterior return from Asia to Africa of these lineages is a more plausible explanation because the genetic diversity of M is much greater in India than in Ethiopia. In fact, M1 could be a branch of the Indian cluster M as ancestral motifs of the African M1 are found in M*, M3 and M4 Indian subclusters. This supposed Indian expansion to the west also reached northern areas, since evolved representatives of M4 have also been detected in Central Asia. We may consider the upper bound for this return to Africa 25.000-47.000 yr BP, the age calculated for M1 in Eastern Africa."Most studies also show Aethiopids to be intermediate, as well. Choose a position and defend it. Are you going to rely on substantiated, academically accepted material all the time like I usually do, or are you going to just champion theories that you like?
|
|
|
Post by topdog on Mar 27, 2005 8:02:33 GMT -5
Pfffft, you wish, sucka! Fool, that came from a 2001 study, this here came from a 2004 study, do you not understand what most recent published data means? Based on the high frequency and diversity of haplogroup M in India and elsewhere in Asia, some authors have suggested (versus [3]) that M may have arisen in Southwest Asia [16,17,31]. Finding M1 or a lineage ancestral to M1 in India, could help to explain the presence of M1 in Africa as a result of a back migration from India. Yet, to date this has not been achieved [15], this study). Therefore, one cannot rule out the still most parsimonious scenario that haplogroup M arose in East Africa [3]. Furthermore, the lack of L3 lineages other than M and N (indeed, L3M and L3N) in India is more consistent with the African launch of haplogroup M. evolutsioon.ut.ee/publications/Metspalu2004.pdfDo you why Ethiopians have an intermediate designation? I can point to published data that says why and it doesn't support intermediate being a product of two races being mixed. Oh foolish one, read my post above, every position I've defended is based on published data.
|
|
|
Post by mike2 on Mar 27, 2005 8:21:42 GMT -5
You didn't say "recent published studies." You said "published studies." In other words, you indicated that that no scientific circle has ever given credence to the idea. I gave you a published study that does. I THEREFORE WIN, INFIDEL! *cuts off TopDog's head with scimitar*
|
|
|
Post by SensoUnico on Mar 27, 2005 11:11:19 GMT -5
Alas poor Badarians. Strouhal holds skull of Badarian and exclaims "Dis is a nigrah". Those poor souls hoped for life after death but they did not realise that people thousands of years later in continents they never heard of would be discussing their hair. The Badarians, at least the rich ones, were interred with their worldly possessions for the afterlife. Things such as cosmetics, toiletries and wigs. Every schoolgirl knows the ancient Egyptians shaved their entire body and wore wigs. Did it not occur to Strouhal and co that the Badarians, their predecessors, would do likewise. And when did people wear wigs made of their own hair. Imagine if Mary Queen of Scots or Elizabeth I were buried with their wigs and some physical anthropologist from Africa came along and found that caucasians have hair similar to horses. What about British Queens' counsels buried with their wigs. Come on, a little commonsense with the Badarians.
|
|
|
Post by topdog on Mar 27, 2005 13:32:38 GMT -5
You didn't say "recent published studies." You said "published studies." In other words, you indicated that that no scientific circle has ever given credence to the idea. I gave you a published study that does. I THEREFORE WIN, INFIDEL! *cuts off TopDog's head with scimitar* You haven't won anything, I proved my point. M1 is considered to be East African, not Veddoid nor Indian. They leave open the possibility that it *may* have been brought back by a back migration, but no evidence exists for a back migration and I did indicate my point by saying the most *recent* published studied, apparently you don't read enough about genetics, you simply copied what someone else posted.
|
|
|
Post by kir on Mar 27, 2005 14:20:49 GMT -5
From a recent paper: evolutsioon.ut.ee/publications/Kivisild2004.pdf“The ancestral status of Moroccan complete sequences at mtDNA coding-region sites that define the major clades present in Ethiopians, however, leaves open the possibility that M1 had originated in North Africa or the Near East instead and was imported to Ethiopia in the remote past, early enough to allow the rise of subclades frequent in and specific to the Horn of Africa.” If this is true, it’s a contradiction to your assumption that M1 was a remnant of the M that didn’t leave Africa, via the southern route. A parental clade to the Ethiopian M1 on the other side of the continent better supports a back migration from Asia, through the northern route.
|
|
|
Post by mike2 on Mar 27, 2005 16:38:15 GMT -5
You haven't won anything, I proved my point. M1 is considered to be East African, not Veddoid nor Indian. They leave open the possibility that it *may* have been brought back by a back migration, but no evidence exists for a back migration and I did indicate my point by saying the most *recent* published studied, apparently you don't read enough about genetics, you simply copied what someone else posted. All I wanted to do was point out that your suspicions were incorrect about it never being considered Veddoid by scientific folk. That doesn't mean it's true, just that scientists have speculated on the possibility before.
|
|
|
Post by joton on Mar 28, 2005 1:08:33 GMT -5
so do you think the Veddoid looking people look similar to this. woman from 18 dynasty amarna era. khufu Princess
|
|
|
Post by topdog on Mar 28, 2005 7:50:20 GMT -5
From a recent paper: evolutsioon.ut.ee/publications/Kivisild2004.pdf“The ancestral status of Moroccan complete sequences at mtDNA coding-region sites that define the major clades present in Ethiopians, however, leaves open the possibility that M1 had originated in North Africa or the Near East instead and was imported to Ethiopia in the remote past, early enough to allow the rise of subclades frequent in and specific to the Horn of Africa.” If this is true, it’s a contradiction to your assumption that M1 was a remnant of the M that didn’t leave Africa, via the southern route. A parental clade to the Ethiopian M1 on the other side of the continent better supports a back migration from Asia, through the northern route. Why did you leave out the sentences that preceded what you just cited? I read that paper and it does say that clades of M1 are found in NA, but the paper also says that a clade(M1c) found in Morocco haven't been tested for in East Africa. M1a and M1b sequences are rare or absent in North Africans (Corte-Real et al. 1996; Rando et al. 1998; Brakez et al. 2001; Plaza et al. 2003). Instead, a third clade, M1c, defined by a transition at np 16185, covers most of haplogroup M1 variation in northwestern Africa, the Canary Islands, and the Near East. M1c has not been sampled yet among Ethiopians.The part you left out: Haplogroups M1 and (preHV)1 occurred at almost equal frequencies among Cushitic- and Semitic-speaking populations of Ethiopia (table 1). Both haplogroups are also common in western Asian Semitic-speaking populations and have occasionally been found in North and northwestern African Berbers (Rando et al. 1998; Richards.......High diversity of M1 among Cushitic populations of East Africa and the absence of specific subclades present among them, in Tigrais and in all western Asian populations, point to an ancient diversification of M1 in East Africa, consistent with the East Africanorigin of the main subgroups of Afro-Asiatic languages (Ehret 1995). The ancestral status of Moroccan complete sequences at mtDNA coding-region sites that define the major clades present in Ethiopians, however, leaves open the possibility that M1 had originated in North Africa or the Near East instead and was imported to Ethiopia in the remote past, early enough to allow the rise of subclades frequent in and specific to the Horn of Africa.evolutsioon.ut.ee/publications/Kivisild2004.pdfAs we can see, if M1c is found in Ethiopians or East Africans, the possibility that it came from Morocco or the Near East is closed, but since M1c hasn't been tested for in Ethiopians/East Africans, M1 cannot be ruled out as having an East African origin. As for M1 being Veddoid, read this citation: Yemeni M sequences show matches with some Indian sequences—for example, in M3 (Kivisild et al. 1999, 2003a; Bamshad et al. 2001). Their presence probably reflects recent gene flow, consistent with the historical fact that southern Yemen was under the rule of British India during 1839–1937 and that a substantial population of South Asians can be found in southern Yemen today.M1 isn't Veddoid, we can positively rule that out.
|
|
|
Post by Igu on Mar 28, 2005 8:40:32 GMT -5
Why did you leave out the sentences that preceded what you just cited? I read that paper and it does say that clades of M1 are found in NA, but the paper also says that a clade(M1c) found in Morocco haven't been tested for in East Africa. M1a and M1b sequences are rare or absent in North Africans (Corte-Real et al. 1996; Rando et al. 1998; Brakez et al. 2001; Plaza et al. 2003). Instead, a third clade, M1c, defined by a transition at np 16185, covers most of haplogroup M1 variation in northwestern Africa, the Canary Islands, and the Near East. M1c has not been sampled yet among Ethiopians.The part you left out: Haplogroups M1 and (preHV)1 occurred at almost equal frequencies among Cushitic- and Semitic-speaking populations of Ethiopia (table 1). Both haplogroups are also common in western Asian Semitic-speaking populations and have occasionally been found in North and northwestern African Berbers (Rando et al. 1998; Richards.......High diversity of M1 among Cushitic populations of East Africa and the absence of specific subclades present among them, in Tigrais and in all western Asian populations, point to an ancient diversification of M1 in East Africa, consistent with the East Africanorigin of the main subgroups of Afro-Asiatic languages (Ehret 1995). The ancestral status of Moroccan complete sequences at mtDNA coding-region sites that define the major clades present in Ethiopians, however, leaves open the possibility that M1 had originated in North Africa or the Near East instead and was imported to Ethiopia in the remote past, early enough to allow the rise of subclades frequent in and specific to the Horn of Africa.evolutsioon.ut.ee/publications/Kivisild2004.pdfAs we can see, if M1c is found in Ethiopians or East Africans, the possibility that it came from Morocco or the Near East is closed, but since M1c hasn't been tested for in Ethiopians/East Africans, M1 cannot be ruled out as having an East African origin. As for M1 being Veddoid, read this citation: Yemeni M sequences show matches with some Indian sequences—for example, in M3 (Kivisild et al. 1999, 2003a; Bamshad et al. 2001). Their presence probably reflects recent gene flow, consistent with the historical fact that southern Yemen was under the rule of British India during 1839–1937 and that a substantial population of South Asians can be found in southern Yemen today.M1 isn't Veddoid, we can positively rule that out. Wrong, both possibilities are open and none are closed.
|
|
|
Post by mike2 on Mar 28, 2005 14:55:55 GMT -5
so do you think the Veddoid looking people look similar to this. woman from 18 dynasty amarna era. khufu Princess It's very possible and certainly an interesting idea. Certainly more interesting than an "everything-in-Africa-has-to-be-Negroid" mentality.
|
|
|
Post by topdog on Mar 28, 2005 15:05:36 GMT -5
It's very possible and certainly an interesting idea. Certainly more interesting than an "everything-in-Africa-has-to-be-Negroid" mentality. Idiot(!), That must be your mentality, Veddoid mixture in Upper Egyptians is ruled out. You just don't want 'Negroids' to have anything to do with Egypt. Your mentality is 'anything' but Negroids are fine with me. If Upper Egyptians have Veddoid mixture based on having M1, East Africans, North Africans, as well as a small number of Europeans have Veddoid mixture. Its funny how you guys here postulate the most #out of this world' theories and try to make them seem believeable.
|
|
|
Post by mike2 on Mar 28, 2005 15:11:59 GMT -5
There ain't nothing wrong with believing the Negroid type to be relatively new to the region. Any theory that connects other races with East Africa is much more believable to me than one that espouses East Africa as a Pan-Negroid zone when the people living there have very little in common with blacks besides pigmentation. And yes, we all hate and fear black Africans so much, TopDog... "All f*cking niggers must f*cking hang." -Animal Mother, from Full Metal Jacket
|
|