|
Post by santana on Mar 26, 2005 15:07:19 GMT -5
great pics alexandrian.. you cant take akhenaton who was considered to be carrying a deformity and say oh what does he look like ... its not accurate.. rameses was considered to be a typical looking egyptian ..
|
|
|
Post by kir on Mar 26, 2005 15:13:54 GMT -5
It was a rare disease; his daughters inherited the same condition as well, less extreme though
|
|
|
Post by santana on Mar 26, 2005 15:28:49 GMT -5
really i didnt know his daughter inherited it as well... btw dont u guys find it interesting that gypsies were thought to be egyptians because they were dark but then now scientists say they are from northern india.. maybe in a weird or crazy way there is a connection... lol i dunno..
|
|
|
Post by joton on Mar 26, 2005 15:44:57 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by topdog on Mar 26, 2005 16:21:06 GMT -5
The only problem with this is that there is no evidence that M1 split off from Indian specific M. Haplogroups M and N left Africa, so M1 is probably African specific M. The only way M1 can be Asian is if M itself is proven to have arisen out of Asia. There is no evidence for that and M1 is older that 12,000 YBP.
|
|
|
Post by kir on Mar 26, 2005 17:03:51 GMT -5
@ TopDog
I disagree that M and N types left Africa, but I agree that L3 left Africa. Once L3 reached Asia it diversified into its M and N types respectively. If Africa was the original home to M and N types then I would expect M and N to be abundant and highly diverse, just as African specific L are abundant and diverse. However this is not the case; M and N types mutated out of Africa, form L3. M diversified in Eastern Asia and N in Western Asia, mainly. I can’s say if M1 is Indian specific, but the closest M types to Africa, excluding recent migrations are Indian specific. So I can speculate.
|
|
|
Post by topdog on Mar 26, 2005 17:13:40 GMT -5
@ TopDog I disagree that M and N types left Africa, but I agree that L3 left Africa. Once L3 reached Asia it diversified into its M and N types respectively. If Africa was the original home to M and N types then I would expect M and N to be abundant and highly diverse, just as African specific L are abundant and diverse. However this is not the case; M and N types mutated out of Africa, form L3. M diversified in Eastern Asia and N in Western Asia, mainly. I can’s say if M1 is Indian specific, but the closest M types to Africa, excluding recent migrations are Indian specific. So I can speculate. M and N did leave Africa-Northeast Africa to be specific. Numerous previous surveys of aboriginal populations have demonstrated that the branches of the mtDNA tree (composed of groups of related haplotypes or haplogroups) are continent-specific, with virtually no mixing of mtDNA haplogroups from the different geographic regions (1). In Africa, the three most ancient mtDNA haplogroups (L0, L1, and L2), which make up macrohaplogroup L, are specific for sub-Saharan Africa. African macrohaplogroup L radiated to form the Africa-specific haplogroup L3 as well as the Eurasian macrohaplogroups M and N. M and N arose in northeastern Africa and individuals bearing M and N mtDNAs subsequently left Africa to colonize Europe and Asia (1, 2).Natural selection shaped regional mtDNA variation in humans www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=140917
|
|
Berter
New Member
Et si on fait un tour ensemble, Nouna!?
Posts: 6
|
Post by Berter on Mar 26, 2005 18:17:35 GMT -5
Hey Mike, I once saw a skull chart comparing skull measurements of different world populations. I saw that the Indian and Upper Egyptian clustered together but the Northern Egyptian skulls clustered with Berber and such. This raised my suspicion that there could be a small Veddoid element in Egypt and Ethiopia, given that indians are like 80 veddoid. Tell me if you know what chart I am talking about, I don’t know where it is anymore. Hey Kir! Are you talking about this : Taken from This webpage.
|
|
Berter
New Member
Et si on fait un tour ensemble, Nouna!?
Posts: 6
|
Post by Berter on Mar 26, 2005 18:24:27 GMT -5
Btw, Mike, How much accurate is the biblical model (or your table of nations) compared to the model of HSs spread proposed in Kir's presentation!?.
|
|
|
Post by shango on Mar 26, 2005 19:11:07 GMT -5
Happy Easter,
You guys brought me back for this one!
They found M1 in West Africa as well in the country of Guinee-Bissau.
evolutsioon.ut.ee/publications/Rosa2004.pdf
The matrilineal genetic composition of 372 samples from the Republic of Guin´e-Bissau (West African coast) was studied using RFLPs and partial sequencing of the mtDNA control and coding region. The majority of the mtDNA lineages of Guineans (94%) belong to West African specific sub-clusters of L0-L3 haplogroups.
A new L3 sub-cluster (L3h) that is found in both eastern and western Africa is present at moderately low frequencies in Guinean populations. A non-random distribution of haplogroups U5 in the Fula group, the U6 among the “Brame” linguistic family and M1 in the Balanta-Djola group, suggests a correlation between the genetic and linguistic affiliation of Guinean populations. The presence of M1 in Balanta populations supports the earlier suggestion of their Sudanese origin.
Haplogroups U5 and U6, on the other hand, were found to be restricted to populations that are thought to represent the descendants of a southern expansion of Berbers.
Particular haplotypes, found almost exclusively in East-African populations, were found in some ethnic groups with an oral tradition claiming Sudanese origin
|
|
|
Post by kir on Mar 26, 2005 19:37:12 GMT -5
BerterThanks Berter, that’s the exact chart, you seem interested in mathematics, and art or connection between the two. Do you know the dimension of that fractal? @top Dog I take it you believe, that M1 developed regionally form the M that didn’t leave Africa 70,000. I hold the opposite view, that M1 was the result of a back migration form Asia, in the last 12,000 years. I’ll leave it to the scientist to figure that one out. I’ll hold my view till I see the truth. But for now many scientists are split on this the same way. Some support a back migration, some don’t. Thanks for the discussion all, till tomorrow.
|
|
|
Post by mike2 on Mar 26, 2005 21:02:27 GMT -5
Veddoids are Australoids, TopDog, just like Andaman Islanders and Australian Aborigines. The Veddoids were widespread in ancient times, forming a belt through India, the Iranian Plateau, Arabia, and with the possibility that M1 is Veddoid (which is a great idea), through Upper Egypt as well. M1 being Veddoid makes more sense to me than it being East African. The Badarians had much more Veddoid, not negroid, tendencies, prognathous jaws and wavy hair. Congoids have prognathous jaws, but never do they have wavy or ringleted hair.
|
|
|
Post by topdog on Mar 27, 2005 2:39:06 GMT -5
Veddoids are Australoids, TopDog, just like Andaman Islanders and Australian Aborigines. Andaman Islanders are Negrito looking people, not Australoids, look at these.. There is nothing Australoid about these people, although some may have mixed with Australoids. They are practically indistinguishable from African Pygmies in terms of phenotype. M1 isn't Veddoid, it has an East African origin from all published data, and the frequency of M1 is higher is East Africa. M1 is even found in one West African population. It seems that everryone wants to postulate the notion of everyone migrating into Africa, but migrating out of Africa nonbody ants to believe. M1 in southern Arabia is due to East African mixture and or ROA migrations, since M took a southern route Out of Africa. No Veddoids in India have M1 East Africans have been in contact with AEs for a much longer period so it makes no sense to postulate a Veddoid connection Which is the same thing Coon tried to say when he denied Negroid mixture in Badarians. Wavy hair is found in abundance in East African populations. You left out the prominent brow ridges found in Veddoids, none are found in AEs nor East Africans, wavy do not a Veddoid solely make.
|
|
|
Post by mike2 on Mar 27, 2005 2:59:03 GMT -5
Do you know what an Australoid is, TopDog?
Australoid can literally be translated "southern race." And that's exactly what they are.
Australoid Subraces: 1.) Negrito (Andaman Isles, Phillipines) 2.) Veddoid (southern India, Sri Lanka, Yemen, and now Egypt if Kir's theory is correct; they are basically the remnant of the Proto-Australoid peoples of all western and southern Asia) 3.) Australian (Australian aborigines) 4.) Papuan-Melanesian (New Guinea, Melanesia)
Negritos (Asian pygmies) have absolutely NO connection to Negrillos (African pygmies). That is an idea even more outdated than Coon. The Negritos are the Australoid version of the African pygmy. Though I have heard that Negritos and Capoids share some kind of relationship.
And by the way, where in East Africa is wavy hair found? And also, I don't think the Badarians were pure Veddoids, so the absence of heavy brow ridges need not matter (see East Indians). I postulate that the Veddoids hybridized with the same Caucasoids that mixed with the negroids in the formation of the Aethiopid race. This Veddoid-Caucasoid hybridization produced the Badarian. I think it's a fantastic idea.
|
|
|
Post by topdog on Mar 27, 2005 3:13:04 GMT -5
Do you know what an Australoid is, TopDog? Australoid can literally be translated "southern race." And that's exactly what they are. Australoid Subraces: 1.) Negrito (Andaman Isles, Phillipines) 2.) Veddoid (southern India, Sri Lanka, Yemen, and now Egypt if Kir's theory is correct; they are basically the remnant of the Proto-Australoid peoples of all western and southern Asia) 3.) Australian (Australian aborigines) 4.) Papuan-Melanesian (New Guinea, Melanesia) Negritos (Asian pygmies) have absolutely NO connection to Negrillos (African pygmies). That is an idea even more outdated than Coon. The Negritos are the Australoid version of the African pygmy. Though I have heard that Negritos and Capoids share some kind of relationship. And by the way, where in East Africa is wavy hair found? And also, I don't think the Badarians were pure Veddoids, so the absence of heavy brow ridges need not matter (see East Indians). I postulate that the Veddoids hybridized with the same Caucasoids that mixed with the negroids in the formation of the Aethiopid race. This Veddoid-Caucasoid hybridization produced the Badarian. I think it's a fantastic idea. Post some evidence for that nonsense. Mike, an there is no way an Australian Aborigine is the same as an Andaman Islander, they look totally different. I never said African and Asian Pygmies are related, I said they look the same. There was no Veddoid element in AEs nor East Africans, thats nonsense as M1 is not Veddoid and makes no sense based on wavy hair. Strouhal et tal found that most Badarain crania had hair that fell into the Negroid periphery, not Australoid and wavy hair is found all across East Africa. Veddoid-Australoid hybridsation=Indians, not East Africans, Arabs or Upper Egyptians.
|
|